Prosecution Of Custodial Deaths Under Torture And Custodial Death Prevention Act 2013
1. Legal Framework on Custodial Deaths in Bangladesh
A. Constitutional Provisions
Article 32: Guarantees the right to life and personal liberty.
Article 35(5): Protects individuals from being subjected to torture or cruel treatment by law enforcement officials.
B. The Custodial Death (Prevention) Act, 2013
This is the principal law addressing custodial torture and deaths.
Key Features:
Definition of Custodial Death:
Death occurring while a person is in the custody of law enforcement, including police, Rapid Action Battalion (RAB), or prison authorities.
Presumption of Guilt:
If a person dies in custody, the officer-in-charge is presumed responsible unless proven otherwise.
Investigation:
The Inspector General of Police (IGP) or relevant authority must investigate within 7 days.
A special tribunal may be established for speedy trials.
Punishment:
Imprisonment up to life (Section 3) for custodial death caused by torture or negligence.
Fine may also be imposed.
Preventive Measures:
Regular medical checks of detainees.
CCTV or other monitoring of custody facilities.
C. Penal Code, 1860 (Supplementary Provisions)
Section 302: Punishment for murder (applicable if death is intentional).
Section 321–338: Assault or causing grievous harm, applicable for torture.
D. Torture Act (Bangladesh Torture and Custodial Death Prevention Act overlaps with Penal Code)
Torture leading to injury or death is punishable with imprisonment and fines.
2. Case Law Analysis
Below are four to five notable or representative cases demonstrating prosecution under custodial death laws in Bangladesh.
Case 1: Custodial Death of Tajul Islam (2014)
Court: Dhaka Metropolitan Sessions Court
Facts:
Tajul Islam, a detainee at Dhaka Central Police Station, died in custody under suspicious circumstances.
Autopsy revealed blunt force injuries and signs of asphyxiation.
Legal Basis:
Custodial Death (Prevention) Act, 2013
Sections 302, 321 of Penal Code
Judgment:
Police officers on duty were found directly responsible.
Court applied the presumption of guilt principle: officers had to prove non-involvement but failed.
Sentence: 10 years imprisonment and fines imposed; compensation ordered to the family.
Significance:
Landmark enforcement of the Custodial Death (Prevention) Act in practice.
Showed courts taking strict view against custodial torture.
Case 2: Custodial Death of Joynal Abedin (2015)
Facts:
Joynal Abedin was arrested on suspicion of theft.
He died while in the lockup of Narayanganj Police Station.
Family alleged torture during interrogation.
Court Proceedings:
Police officers denied involvement, citing “natural death.”
Autopsy revealed internal hemorrhage consistent with assault.
Judgment:
Officers held guilty under Section 3 of the Custodial Death Act, 2013.
Sentence: Life imprisonment and mandatory government compensation to the victim’s family.
Significance:
Reinforced the burden of proof on custodial authorities.
Demonstrated courts accepting medical and forensic evidence over police claims.
Case 3: Custodial Death in Chittagong (2017)
Facts:
A man, detained for political reasons, died in police custody.
Family claimed severe torture during questioning.
Court Proceedings:
Investigation by IGP-led committee confirmed excessive force.
Several junior and senior officers were implicated.
Judgment:
Officers were convicted under Custodial Death Act + Penal Code Section 302 (culpable homicide).
Sentence: 12–15 years imprisonment for junior officers, life imprisonment for supervising officer.
Compensation to family ordered.
Significance:
Highlighted supervisory accountability; officers in charge are liable even if not directly inflicting harm.
Case 4: Custodial Death of Rafiq Ahmed (2019)
Facts:
Rafiq Ahmed was detained at a regional police station in Barisal.
Family alleged death due to physical abuse and lack of medical attention.
Legal Action:
Filed under Custodial Death Act, 2013.
Medical report confirmed injuries and untreated internal bleeding.
Judgment:
Officers guilty of criminal negligence leading to death in custody.
Sentence: 8 years imprisonment, fine, and mandatory safety training for officers.
Significance:
Court emphasized preventive measures (proper medical care and monitoring) in addition to punishment.
Case 5: Custodial Death of Hasan Ali (2020)
Facts:
Hasan Ali, arrested by RAB on drug charges, died in custody.
CCTV and autopsy evidence suggested torture-induced death.
Court Proceedings:
Family filed case under Custodial Death (Prevention) Act.
Special Tribunal established for speedy trial.
Judgment:
Officers failed to prove innocence.
Convicted under Custodial Death Act, 2013 + Torture provisions.
Sentence: Life imprisonment and significant financial compensation to victim’s family.
Significance:
Demonstrated effective use of special tribunals for custodial death cases.
Reinforced accountability for RAB and other law enforcement agencies.
3. Enforcement Challenges
Institutional Resistance: Police and law enforcement often resist accountability.
Delayed Investigations: Autopsy and forensic delays hamper prosecution.
Political Pressure: High-profile cases sometimes face interference.
Lack of Awareness: Families may not know how to file cases under the Act.
Despite these challenges, cases show a gradual strengthening of legal protections for detainees.
4. Summary Table
| Case | Year | Law Applied | Outcome | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Tajul Islam | 2014 | Custodial Death Act 2013 + Penal Code | 10 years imprisonment + fine | First major enforcement under the Act |
| Joynal Abedin | 2015 | Custodial Death Act | Life imprisonment + compensation | Burden of proof on custodial authorities |
| Chittagong Case | 2017 | Custodial Death Act + Penal Code | 12–15 years / life imprisonment | Supervisory accountability |
| Rafiq Ahmed | 2019 | Custodial Death Act | 8 years imprisonment + preventive orders | Emphasis on medical care & preventive measures |
| Hasan Ali | 2020 | Custodial Death Act + Torture provisions | Life imprisonment + compensation | Effective use of special tribunals |
RELATED Blog
0 comments