The Supreme Court on Monday adjourned the hearing in a plea filed by former law minister Ashwani Kumar seeking directions against custodial torture. The Court has observed that the matter be heard by the same Bench that had originally passed orders in the matter concerning custodial torture.
The matter was listed today before the three-judge bench of Justices A.M. Khanwilkar, B.R. Gavai and Krishna Murari.
During the hearing today, petitioner Ashwani Kumar submitted before the Court that this is a year of hope and, therefore, he hopes that the Supreme Court being custodian of the Constitution will protect basic human rights of people in custody.
The Bench observed that as the original order was passed by a bench where Justice Dinesh Maheshwari was a member, this case should be heard by the same Bench, as judicial propriety demands that the matter go before the same court.
Attorney General K.K. Venugopal submitted that the same issue of custodial torture was decided and guidelines were issued in 1997 in the case of D.K. Basu where Dr A.M. Singhvi was appointed amicus curiae. As that plea is still being heard, this matter should also be added to that case.
The plea was filed by senior advocate and former Law Minister Dr Ashwani Kumar in 2016, seeking directions to the Central Government to enact a suitable stand-alone, comprehensive legislation against custodial torture as it has directed in the case of mob violence/lynching.
The plea was filed for an effective and purposive legislative framework/law based upon the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, adopted by the United Nations General Assembly and opened for signature, ratification and accession on December 10, 1984. India had signed the UN Convention on October 14, 1997 but did not ratify it.
The Apex Court had rejected the petitioner’s prayer that had sought direction to enact a suitable standalone comprehensive legislation based on the UN Convention in consonance with the Constitution of India. However, the Court had clarified that this would not in any way affect the jurisdiction of the courts to deal with individual cases of alleged custodial torture and pass appropriate orders and directions in accordance with the law.
Also Read: Intellectual Property Appellate Board order fixes statutory licensing rate for radio royalties
16684_2020_34_9_25212_Order_04-Jan-2021