Justice is not about 'teaching someone a lesson': Chhattisgarh HC's observation criticized
This article critiques a Chhattisgarh High Court observation in a custodial death case, where police officers were deemed to have intended 'to teach a lesson' to the victim. The author argues that such judicial language rationalizes state violence and normalizes custodial torture, undermining constitutional principles of dignity, due process, and proportionality. The victim, a Dalit man, died after severe assault in custody, highlighting caste-coded enforcement. The High Court's failure to intervene on the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act aspect, by demanding explicit proof of caste motivation, is also criticized. The piece emphasizes that judicial integrity requires courts to reject the idea of violence as disciplinary and to ensure robust application of laws to protect vulnerable groups.
Key Points
- The Chhattisgarh High Court's observation that police intended 'to teach a lesson' in a custodial death case is criticized for rationalizing state violence.
- Such judicial language normalizes custodial torture and undermines constitutional values of justice, dignity, and due process.
- The case involved a Dalit victim, highlighting the issue of caste-coded enforcement and the judiciary's narrow interpretation of the SC/ST Act.
- Courts must reinforce that custodial violence is criminal, not disciplinary, and ensure robust application of laws to protect vulnerable groups.
- The article cites Supreme Court judgments that emphasize procedural safeguards and strict limits on police force.
Exam Facts
- Chhattisgarh High Court.
- Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (SC/ST Act).
- Supreme Court judgments cited: Shri D.K. Basu, Ashok K. Johri vs State of West Bengal, Munshi Singh Gautam (D) and Ors. vs State of M.P.
- Victim was a Dalit man.
Read it. Retain it. Recall it.
Get spaced-repetition flashcards, daily quizzes and offline access — free on Android.