SHRI DILIP K. BASU ETC.versusSTATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ORS.

                     SHRI DILIP K. BASU ETC.                                 A
                                     v.
               STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ORS.

                          ·AUGUST 1, 1997

            [DR. A.S. ANAND AND K.T. THOMAS, JJ.]                            B

     Constitution of India, 1950 :

     Articles 21, 22 and 32-Custodial violence--Directions given in D.K
Vasu's case*-Compliance report sought from respective authorities.           C
     *D.K Basu .v. State ofWest Bengal, [1997) i SCC 416, referred to.
                 .                                                       .

     CRIMINAL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION : Criminal Misc. Petition
No. 4201 of 1997.

     Under Article 32 of the Constitution of India                           D

                                     IN

     Writ Petition (Cr!.) No. 539 of 1986.

      Under Article 32 of the Constitution of India:                         E
     Writ Petition (Cr!.) No. 592/87.

      Dr. A.M. Singhvi, Additional Solicitor General (A.C.), Ms. Suruchi
Agrawal, Sushi! Kumar, Jain, Y.P. Dhainija, B. Krishna Prasad, Ms. A.
Subhashini, B.B. Singh, Uma Nath Singh, B.S. Chahar; Ashok Mathur, Ms.       F
Hemantika Wahi, Ms. Nandini Mukherjee, Kailash Vasdev, C.K. Sasi, Raj
Kumar Mehta, Dilip Sinha, K.R. Nagaraja, Ms. S. · Janani, Aruneshwar
Gupta, G.Prakash, Ms. Beena Prakash, Shakil Ahmed Syed, S.M. Jadhav,
D.M. Nargolkar, A.S. Pundir, R.B. Misra, Guntur Prabhakar, Prem Mal-
hotra, M. Veerappa, R.S. Sodhi, J.K. Manhas, v, Krihnamurthy, D.N.
Mukherjee, T. Sridharan, Gopal Singh, D.S. Mehra, Ms. Kamakshi Singh         G
Mehlwal, V.G. Pragasam and Ms. KaminiJaiswal for the appearing parties.

     The following Order of the Court was dr.livered :

    On December 18, 1996 in D.K. Basu v. State of West Bengal, [1997]
1sec416, this Court laid down certain basic "requirements' to be followed    H
                                     :ii9
                         SUPREME COURT REPORTS (1997] SUPP. 3 S.C.R.

A in all cases of arrest or detention till legal provisions are made in that
    behalf as a measure to prevent custodial violence. The requirements read
    as follows:

            "1. The police personnel carrying out the arrest and handling the
            interrogation of the arrestee should bear accurate, visible and clear
B           identification and name tags with their designations. The par-
            ticulars of all such police personnel who handle interrogation of
            the arrestee mu5t be recorded in a register.

            2. That the police officer carrying out the arrest of the arrestee
            shall prepare a memo of arrest at the time of arrest and such memo
c           shall be attested by at least one witness, who may either be a
            member of the family of the arrestee or a respectable person of
            the locality from where the arrest is made. It shall also be counter-
            signed by the arrestee and shall contain the time and date of arrest.

D           3. A person who has been arrested or detained and is being held
            in custody in a police station or interrogation centre or other
            lock-up, shall be entitled to have one friend or relative or other
            person known to him or having interest in his welfare being
            informed, as soon as practicable, that he has been arrested and is
            being detained at the particular place, unless the attesting witness
E           of the memo of arrest is himself such a friend or a relative of the
            arrestee.

            4. The time, place of arrest and venue of custody of an arrestee
            must be notified by the police where the next friend or relative of
            the arrestee Jives outside the district or town through the Legal
F           Aid Organisation in the District and the police station of the area
            concerned telegraphically within a period of 8 to 12 hours after·
            the arrest.

             5. The person arrested must be made aware of this right to have
G            someone informed of his arrest or detention as soon as he is put
             under arrest or is detained.

             6. An entry must be made in the diary at the place of detention
             regarding the arrest of the person which shall also disclosed the
             name of the next friend of the person who has been informed of
H            the arrest and the names and particulars of the police officials in
                          D.K. BJ\SU v. STATE                          221

        whose custody the arrestee is.                                        A
        7. The arrestee should, where he so requests, be also examined at
        the time of his arrest and major and minor injuries, if any present
        on his/her body, must be recorded at that time. The "Inspection
        Memo" must be signed both by the arrestee and the police officer      B
        effecting the arrest and its copy provided to the arrestee and the
        police officer effecting the arrest and its copy provided to the
        arrestee.

        8. The arrestee should be subjected to medical examination by a
        trained doctor every 48 hours during his detention in custody by C
        a doctor on the panel of approved doctors appointed by Director,
        Health Services of the State or Union Territory concerned. Direc-
        tor, Health Services should prepare such a panel for all tehsils and
        district as well.
                                                                              D
        9. Copies of all the documents including the memo of arrest,
        referred to above, should be sent to the Illaqa Magistrate for his.
        record.

        10. The arrestee may be permitted to meet his lawyer during
        interrogation, though not throughout the interrogation.               E
        11. A police control room should be_ provided at all district and
        State headquarters, where information regarding the arrest and
        the place of custody of the arrestee shall be communicated by the
        officer causing the arrest, within 12 hours of effecting the arrest
        and at the police control room it should be displayed on a con-       F
        spicuous notice board."

       This Court also opined that failure to comply with the above re-
quirements, apart from rendering the official concerned liable for
departmental action, would also render him liable to be punished for G
contempt of court and the proceedings for contempt of court could be
instituted in any High Court of the country, having territorial jurisdiction
over the matter. This Court further observed :

        "The requirements mentioned above shall be forwarded to the
        Director General of Police and the Home Secretary of every H
    222                  SUPREME COURTREPORTS (1997] SUPP. 3 S.C.R.

A           ~tate/Union Territory and it shall be their obligation to circulate
            the same to every police station under their charge and get the
            same notified at every police station at a conspicuous place. It
            would also be useful and serve larger interest to broadcast the
            requirements on All India Radio besides being shown on the
            National Network of Doordarshan any by publishing and distribut-
B           ing pamphlets in the local language obtaining these requirements
            for information of the general public. Creating awareness about
            the rights of the arrestee would in our opinion be a step in the ,
            right direction to combat the evil of custodial crime and bring in
            transparency and accountability. It is hoped that these require-
c           ments would help to curb, if not totally eliminate, the use of
            questionable methods during interrogation and investigation lead-
            ing to custodial commission of crimes."

        More than seven months have elapsed since the directions were
  issued. Through these petitions, Dr. Singhvi, the learned Ainicus Curiae,
D who had assisted the Court in the main petition, seeks a direction, calling
  upon the Director General of Police and the Home Secretary of every
  State/Union Territory to report to this Court compliance of the above
  directions and the steps taken by the All India Radio and the National
  Network of Doordarshan for broadcasting the requirements.
E
           We direct the Registry to send a copy of this application, together
    with a copy of this order to respondents 1 to 31 to have the report/reports
    from the Director General of Police and the Home Secretary of the
    concerned State/Union Territory, sent to this Court regarding the com-
    pliance of the above directions concerning arrestees. The report shall
F   indicate in a tabular form as to which of the "requirements" has been
    carried out and in what manner, as also which are the "requirements" which
    still remain to be carried out and the steps being taken for carrying out
    those.

G         R~port shall also be obtained from the Directors of All India Radio
    and Doordarshan regarding broadcasts made.

          The notice on respondents 1 to 31, in addition, may also be served
    through the standing counsel of the respective States/Union Territories in
    the Supreme Court. After the reports are received, copies of the same shall
H   be furnished to the Advocate on Record for Dr. Singhvi, Ms. Suruchi
                          K.K BASU v. STATE                           223

Agrawal, Advocate.                                                           A
     The reports shall be submitted to this .court in the terms, indicated
above, within six weeks from today. The matters shall be· put up on board
for monitoring, after seven weeks.

R.P.                                                Crl. M.P. pending and
                                                     Petition disposed of.