D.K. Basu v. State of West Bengal
[1996] Supp 10 SCR 284 · Supreme Court of India · Decision date: 1996-12-18
Key issue
What arrest safeguards and public-law remedies are required to protect life and liberty in custody?
Facts
Reports of deaths in police custody prompted a letter seeking judicial intervention against custodial violence. Case number: W.P. (Crl.) 539/1986 and connected matter
Holding
Arrest does not extinguish constitutional protection against torture. The Court prescribed eleven preventive requirements and affirmed public-law compensation for established fundamental-rights violations. Transparency, records and access to outside assistance reduce abuse concealed within custody. Investigation cannot justify torture. Binding directions included officer identification, an arrest memorandum, notification of relatives, custody records, medical examination and access to a lawyer during interrogation, though not throughout it. Noncompliance could attract contempt and departmental action. Single judgment by A.S. Anand; no dissent recorded. Provisions considered at judgment date: Constitution: Articles 21, 22 and 32; Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.
Pinpoints
PDF p. 27 — Arrest safeguards begin; PDF p. 28 — Arrest safeguards continued; PDF p. 29 — Safeguards and enforcement; PDF p. 37 — Public-law compensation. PDF page numbers are 1-based and may differ from printed reporter pages.
Verification status
Source checked
Source note
Original TLG research note based on the linked official judgment, not an official court summary. Source identity and selected holding passages checked on 4 November 2026.
Current treatment
A Supreme Court decision dated 18 March 2024 reiterates these principles. Present-day statutory arrest procedure requires a separate check; this entry describes the 1996 judgment. Historical case note; exhaustive subsequent treatment and current statutory application have not been checked.