By Renata Politi, Legal Advisor at REDRESS
In 2024 alone, India's National Human Rights Commission (NHRC), an independent watchdog, registered 130 new complaints of custodial deaths, bringing the total number of cases pending before the body to over 2,400. This figure, while shocking, represents only the tip of the iceberg and does not reflect the full reality of state violence in India. Behind police station walls and beyond judicially sanctioned detention, torture and inhumane treatment do not just occur—they have become part of the institutional functioning: a routine tool of law enforcement. Today, torture in India is systemic and largely unchecked.
India's continued failure to ratify the United Nations Convention Against Torture (UNCAT), nearly thirty years after signing it, is both a symptom and a cause of the prevailing impunity. The absence of a specific legal prohibition of torture in domestic law has allowed state authorities—particularly the police, security forces, and armed personnel—to act without fear of consequences. In a democracy that constitutionally guarantees dignity, this is a crisis of law and justice.
A new report published by REDRESS provides further evidence of this disturbing picture: torture is used to extract confessions, gather information, silence dissent, punish marginalized groups, and maintain control. Our report draws on years of documentation by Indian civil society organizations and courageous human rights defenders who, often at great personal risk, have exposed patterns of state abuse.
Agrandissement : Illustration 1
Protections systematically ignored
India's legal framework provides theoretical safeguards for those in detention, including the right to legal assistance and prompt appearance before a magistrate. The Supreme Court has also issued guidelines for the installation of CCTV cameras in police stations to deter abuses. Yet, in practice, these protections are routinely ignored or undermined. Recent criminal law reforms have expanded police powers while weakening oversight—increasing the risk of torture in detention.
Torture survivors face a rocky road to justice. Police frequently refuse to register complaints; investigations are delayed or manipulated; and prosecutions, when they occur, rarely result in convictions. Oversight bodies like the NHRC are underfunded and largely ineffective. Even police complaints authorities—supposed to act as independent monitors—when they function, remain dependent on the forces they are supposed to monitor.
Communities disproportionately affected
Under laws such as the Armed Forces Special Powers Act (AFSPA) and the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act (UAPA), broad immunities have enabled massive human rights violations—including torture, enforced disappearances, and extrajudicial killings—particularly in “disturbed” or militarized areas. These laws, which grant sweeping powers to security personnel, operate in legal gray areas, allowing abuses to flourish under the guise of counterterrorism.
Those on the margins of power are often the most affected—whether because of caste, religion, ethnicity, or political position. Dalits, Adivasis, Muslims, and other marginalized communities are disproportionately affected, with discrimination deeply embedded in institutional responses. Torture is also used as a tool of political repression. Journalists, lawyers, protesters, and human rights defenders face arbitrary arrests and ill-treatment in detention. Peaceful protests have been disproportionately repressed, including with live ammunition and less-lethal weapons.
In recent years, laws like the UAPA have been used to criminalize peaceful criticism of the government—framing dissent as a threat to national security. This has created a climate of intimidation where space for civil society is rapidly shrinking, and the cost of speaking out is devastating.
A weak global response
Despite mounting evidence, the international response remains disappointingly silent. While 31 states expressed concerns during India's most recent Universal Periodic Review, bilateral exchanges have largely avoided the issue. India's geopolitical clout and economic importance appear to shield it from diplomatic pressure that might prompt reform. This silence, in fact, allows abuses to continue.
India's torture crisis is not irremediable—but change will require more than legal reforms. It will require political will, institutional overhaul, and sustained domestic and international pressure. The Indian government must urgently ratify UNCAT, criminalize torture in its domestic law, and repeal or amend laws that enable abuses. States with diplomatic and commercial ties with India must also uphold their own human rights obligations by demanding concrete reforms.
The REDRESS report is a call to action. It exposes a deeply entrenched system of torture—but it also highlights the resilience of those fighting for justice: the survivors who come forward despite the risks, and the activists who continue to testify. Their courage must be met with action, not silence.
India cannot claim to respect the rule of law as long as torture remains a feature of its judicial system. The time for meaningful reforms—legal, structural, and cultural—is well past.