The Jharkhand High Court on Thursday strongly rebuked the state government for failing to adhere to the statutory requirement that all custodial death investigations be conducted exclusively by judicial magistrates. A division bench comprising Chief Justice M S Sonak and Justice Rajesh Shankar was hearing a public interest litigation filed by Md Mumtaz Ansari, which highlighted the large number of custodial deaths in the state since 2018 that have not been properly investigated.
Court Directs Corrective Measures
In a detailed 33-page judgment delivered on Thursday, the court directed the principal district judges of the concerned districts and the home secretary to ensure that all custodial death cases are probed by judicial magistrates, as mandated by law. The court noted that many such deaths had been investigated by executive magistrates instead, which is a violation of the statutory framework. The principal district judges have been instructed to appoint judicial magistrates to conduct fresh inquiries within six months.
Government's Affidavit Reveals Discrepancies
The state government had earlier submitted an affidavit to the court, stating that there were 427 custodial deaths in Jharkhand since 2018. However, the affidavit also revealed that only 225 of these deaths were investigated by judicial magistrates, while 262 were probed by executive magistrates. The court observed a glaring discrepancy in the numbers provided, as the total of 225 and 262 exceeds the stated figure of 427. The bench remarked, “The discrepancy in the numbers of deaths provided by the state speaks of its systemic disregard for the law and casts a serious doubt on the state’s velocity and diligence in maintaining records.”
Implications for Accountability
The high court’s intervention underscores the importance of independent judicial oversight in custodial death cases to ensure transparency and accountability. By directing a fresh probe by judicial magistrates, the court aims to restore faith in the investigative process. The home secretary has been tasked with coordinating with district authorities to comply with the order.
About the Author: Chandrajit Mukherjee is a second-generation practicing advocate in the Jharkhand High Court since 2005. He has been reporting on legal beats for print media since 2000, contributing news on judgments, orders, and decisions from the High Court and other judicial forums, including legal services authorities and the Judicial Academy.
