Asserting that custodial violence has a "chilling effect" on the society and it erodes the credibility of police, the government's police think tank has come out with a draft Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) for the forces that include displaying the name of those arrested on notice boards and providing them food and water at regular intervals.
The ‘Draft SOP for Safeguarding Persons to be Arrested/Detained by the Police Authorities Against Custodial Violence’ prepared by the Bureau of Police Research and Development (BPRD) emphasised that "arresting as a regular act or arresting for the sake of routine issues" must be avoided.
The draft prepared under the instruction of the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) also advises not to summon any male below 15 years or above 65 years or a woman for questioning to police station and they should be interrogated at their residence.
"Do not subject any person in custody to torture, beating or cruel treatment. Ensure not to detain anyone for a prolonged period in the name of interrogation as this may amount to wrongful confinement and illegal detention," it said.
While asking police to ensure that the names of arrested are displayed on notice boards and they are given food and water, the SOP also suggested that those in custody must be provided facility to have a bath and change of clothes – undergarments in particular, on an everyday basis. "This is important for the hygiene of the arrestee as well as the police officers interrogating and dealing with the arrestee," it said.
The SOP aims to lay down professional guidelines for police officers to deal with accused persons or détenu in custody and enable the forces to frame mechanisms to stop custodial violence and fix responsibility of the erring personnel, as well as to review the existing mechanism, if one such exists.
"Wide coverage of the incidents of custodial violence by the media, including the social media causes a serious loss of face to the police. The image of the police takes a severe beating, as immense good work done by the police is overshadowed by such abhorrent incidents of custodial violence," it said.
While advising that arrests should be made only in exceptional circumstances, it said a notice of appearance should be sent to a person against whom a reasonable complaint, credible information or reasonable suspicion exists to appear before police. Only when such a person refuses to appear, then arrests should be made.
A police personnel also has to record in writing whether at least one of the eight conditions mentioned in the draft is satisfied while arresting a person. It included that the arrest is necessary to prevent committing further offences or ensure proper investigation or to ensure cooperation from fear stricken victims who will otherwise be reluctant to come forward due to fear of the accused.
The draft also suggests that the police personnel involved in arresting any person must wear visible name tags and their names should also be recorded in the police diary.
"One person of the arrestee’s choice must be informed about the arrest. Date, place and time of detention must also be conveyed as soon as practicable unless the witness to the memo of arrest was the person of his choice and was present at the venue of arrest," it said.
"Police personnel affecting the arrest must do it with minimum use of force and publicity. A person must be informed why and by whose authority, his arrest is being executed. Arrestee should be requested to cooperate," it said.
While arresting a woman, the SOP said, if a woman police official is not available, then the woman to be arrested should be allowed to have one person who should be a woman with her as a companion and should be allowed to remain with the arrested woman throughout the process.
On the detention and interrogation of children, the SOP wanted police to take special care not to use "accusatory or adversarial language". Such children should be dealt with empathy and great care and they should not be treated at par with adult offenders.
In custody, the SOP reminded that an arrested person has a right to consult and have a legal practitioner to defend himself and a lawyer could also be consulted while interrogation is going on but not throughout the duration of the entire interrogation.