Custodial Deaths and Compensation: Building a Constitutional Framework for Accountability in the Surveillance Era

  • Unique Paper ID: 208579
  • Volume: 13
  • Issue: 4
  • PageNo: 1961-1963
  • Abstract:
  • Deaths in custody represent one of the most serious breaches of fundamental rights under Article 21 of the Indian Constitution. Although the Supreme Court has recognized compensation as a constitutional duty in cases such as Nilabati Behera v. State of Orissa (1993 [11]) and D.K. Basu v. State of West Bengal (1997 [5]), India still lacks a uniform statutory framework to ensure timely and adequate relief. This paper examines custodial violence in the broader context of surveillance and wrongful detention, arguing that compensation must be automatic and victim centred. Comparative insights from the European Court of Human Rights (McCann v. United Kingdom, 1995 [10]; Big Brother Watch v. United Kingdom, 2021 [16]), U.S. civil rights litigation under §1983 (Carpenter v. United States, 2018 [6]), and South African jurisprudence on constitutional damages [15] highlight how liability can be embedded into governance. The study proposes a four pillar model—proportionality, judicial oversight, transparency, and rehabilitation—to strengthen custodial justice and align India with global human rights standards.

Copyright & License

Copyright © 2026 Authors retain the copyright of this article. This article is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

BibTeX

@article{208579,
        author = {Rajesh. M and Dr. Sunil Dutt Chaturvedi and Dr, Karan Singh Yadav},
        title = {Custodial Deaths and Compensation: Building a Constitutional Framework for Accountability in the Surveillance Era},
        journal = {International Journal of Innovative Research in Technology},
        year = {2026},
        volume = {13},
        number = {4},
        pages = {1961-1963},
        issn = {2349-6002},
        url = {https://ijirt.org/article?manuscript=208579},
        abstract = {Deaths in custody represent one of the most serious breaches of fundamental rights under Article 21 of the Indian Constitution. Although the Supreme Court has recognized compensation as a constitutional duty in cases such as Nilabati Behera v. State of Orissa (1993 [11]) and D.K. Basu v. State of West Bengal (1997 [5]), India still lacks a uniform statutory framework to ensure timely and adequate relief. This paper examines custodial violence in the broader context of surveillance and wrongful detention, arguing that compensation must be automatic and victim centred. Comparative insights from the European Court of Human Rights (McCann v. United Kingdom, 1995 [10]; Big Brother Watch v. United Kingdom, 2021 [16]), U.S. civil rights litigation under §1983 (Carpenter v. United States, 2018 [6]), and South African jurisprudence on constitutional damages [15] highlight how liability can be embedded into governance. The study proposes a four pillar model—proportionality, judicial oversight, transparency, and rehabilitation—to strengthen custodial justice and align India with global human rights standards.},
        keywords = {Custodial Deaths; Victim Compensation; Constitutional Torts; Surveillance; Human Rights},
        month = {September},
        }

Cite This Article

M, R., & Chaturvedi, D. S. D., & Yadav, D. K. S. (2026). Custodial Deaths and Compensation: Building a Constitutional Framework for Accountability in the Surveillance Era. International Journal of Innovative Research in Technology (IJIRT), 13(4), 1961–1963.

Related Articles