Allow Cookies!
By using our website, you agree to the use of cookies
In a recent webinar featuring Justice Deepak Gupta, former Union Law Minister Dr. Ashwini Kumar and National Editor of Political Affairs at Hindustan Times Sunetra Choudhary. This webinar was moderated by a Supreme Court Advocate Miss Avani Bansal.
The discussion of this webinar mainly focused on the topic of Custodial Death of the father-son duo in Tamil Nadu. he father-son duo was picked by the police for keeping their shop open till 15 minutes after the curfew hours. The duo was harshly beaten up in police custody which led to the death of the father-son duo, to which the police clarified by releasing a public statement in the press where they said that they died due to heart illness.
Advocate Avani Bansal asked Justice Deepak Gupta, despite the existence of serious guidelines that underlines the rights of the prisoners which were laid down in the case DK Basu V. State of West Bengal, where there was a challenge to its implementations.
To this question, Justice Gupta responded stating that though there was no questioning of the need of the anti-torture law, the same can only be introduced by the Parliament and not by the Supreme Court (in reference to the petition filed by Dr. Ashwani Kumar seeking for an anti-torture law, which had been dismissed by the Supreme Court). He further added that the court can only decide what is legal and what is not. He added that he had been called an activist judge but he can be an activist only within the corners of the law.
The Former SC judge further highlighted that the need of the hour was proper implementation of the existing laws. The former judge said the investigations and the prosecutions are not fair, which must be rectified first and spoke about the recent incident of death of father and son due to torture in police custody in Tamil Nadu, where he said that “ there were rules that were violated.”
Further, Kumar said that India is yet to enact a law which is a prerequisite for us to become a responsible member of the international legal regime against torture. Kumar had filed a PIL before the Supreme Court seeking a direction to the Centre to frame a law on custodial torture and inhuman treatment as India was a signatory to the United Nations' convention on torture.
The Supreme Court later disposed of the PIL after the Attorney General submitted that the plea against torture was discussed by the Law Commission and it has made certain recommendations and the same was being "seriously considered" by the central government.
86540
103860
630
114
59824