SC reserves verdict on PIL seeking framing of law to prevent custodial torture

The Supreme Court on Thursday reserved its verdict on a PIL by former Union law minister Ashwini Kumar seeking a direction to the Centre to frame a law to prevent custodial torture and inhuman treatment as India was a signatory to the United Nations' convention in this regard.

The apex court, which on Wednesday had accorded a day-long hearing on the PIL after Kumar had submitted that he has not been heard, Thursday reserved the judgement after the senior Congress leader, Attorney General K K Venugopal, amicus curiae and senior lawyer Colin Gonsalves and the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) concluded their submissions.

The former law minister and senior advocate, in his PIL, has said the India has been signatory of the United Nations' Convention Against Torture since 1997 and has not ratified it so it has not made the law on custodial torture so far.

While Gonsalves, who is assisting the court as an amicus curiae, and the counsel for NHRC supported the plea of Kumar, the Centre sought some time saying that it was in the process of receiving objections and suggestions from the states on the proposed law.

Yesterday, a bench of Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi and justices Dinesh Maheshwari and Sanjiv Khanna had taken note of the submission of Kumar that he was not heard and had said that it would hear him in detail.

"Everybody seems to say this that they are not being heard. Let us discharge the board today and hear only this. We have been on that side and now on this side. We know the compulsions. We know how many cases are begging for our attention," the bench had said.

Kumar had said that a slight "nudge" from the court would force Parliament to make the law in view of the fact that only seven countries of the world are yet to frame it and, moreover, he claimed, "five persons are killed everyday in custody in the country".

The PIL filed in 2016 by Kumar, who is a Congress leader, was disposed of on November 27, 2017 and since then there has been no progress, prompting him to approach the court again.

Venugopal had said that the Centre has acted as per the direction of the court and several states have given their objections and suggestions to the draft legislation and the government would come back to the court after completing the process of getting the opinions of states.

He had also said that law and order and police are state subjects and the Centre was duty bound to take their views on the proposed law.

Earlier, the apex court had directed the chief secretaries of all state governments to give within three weeks their feedback on the Centre's draft law to prevent custodial torture and inhuman treatment.

Venugopal had said that the central government has circulated the draft bill to all the states for their feedback.

The Rajya Sabha MP had also narrated the sequence of events as to how the bill was passed in Lok Sabha in 2010, but Upper House sent it to the select committee.

Kumar, in his PIL, sought directions to frame an effective law on the issue and empower agencies like the NHRC with necessary enforcement capabilities and mechanisms to implement its orders and directions.