Custodial Death of Kalicharan Kewat: Police Brutality, Delayed Justice, and the Cost of State Apathy


 

Custodial Death of Kalicharan Kewat: Police Brutality, Delayed Justice, and the Cost of State Apathy

The custodial death of Kalicharan Kewat, a 29-year-old youth from Bokaro district in Jharkhand, is a grave reminder of the continuing crisis of custodial violence in India. The case exposes serious violations of constitutional safeguards, abuse of police power, and prolonged administrative indifference—despite repeated interventions by the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC).

Background of the Incident

On 18 February 2022, Kalicharan Kewat was picked up by police from Balidih Police Station, Bokaro, on suspicion of theft. He was detained along with another youth, Sanjay Singh. Mandatory legal procedures were blatantly ignored:

  • No arrest memo was prepared

  • Family members were not informed

  • The detainees were not produced before a magistrate within the statutory time

According to witness accounts and the statement of the co-accused, both individuals were subjected to physical assault while in police custody.

On 19 February 2022, Kalicharan’s condition deteriorated, and he was taken to hospital, where he succumbed to his injuries.

Complaint Before NHRC

The incident was formally brought to the NHRC through a complaint filed by human rights defender Dr. Lenin Raghuvanshi, alleging custodial torture and illegal detention (Case No. 263/34/1/2022-AD).

The complaint highlighted:

  • Torture and ill-treatment in custody

  • Violation of Articles 21 and 22 of the Constitution

  • Attempts to suppress facts following the custodial death

Findings and Procedural Violations

Illegal Detention

A Magisterial Inquiry conducted by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bokaro, confirmed that Kalicharan was illegally detained and mistreated. This alone constituted a serious breach of constitutional and statutory protections.

Custodial Violence

Co-accused Sanjay Singh testified that both detainees were beaten by the police. He stated that he lost consciousness during the assault and later learned of Kalicharan’s death.

Suspicious Circumstances of Death

Although the post-mortem reportedly did not record visible external injuries, the NHRC emphasized that any death in police custody carries a presumption of state responsibility unless conclusively disproved.

NHRC-Ordered Compensation: ₹5 Lakhs to the Victim’s Family

Recognizing the custodial death as a gross violation of the right to life, the NHRC, in its order dated 21 November 2024, recommended that the Government of Jharkhand pay ₹5,00,000 (Rupees Five Lakhs) as monetary compensation to the next of kin of Kalicharan Kewat.

This compensation was recommended as public law relief for violation of Article 21 of the Constitution, independent of any criminal liability of the responsible police officials.

Delay in Disbursement

  • The Home, Prisons and Disaster Management Department, Government of Jharkhand, sanctioned the compensation on 18 August 2025.

  • However, proof of actual payment was not submitted to the NHRC despite repeated reminders.

Final Warning by NHRC

In its communication dated 19 January 2026, the NHRC issued a final reminder, directing the State to:

  • Furnish proof of payment within four weeks

  • Failing which, the Commission may initiate action under Section 13 of the Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993, including enforcement of personal attendance of the erring officers

The Commission categorically stated that mere sanction of compensation is insufficient—actual disbursement and compliance are mandatory.

Why This Compensation Matters

While no amount can compensate for the loss of a human life, the ₹5 lakh compensation:

  • Acknowledges state responsibility for custodial death

  • Acts as a deterrent against police brutality

  • Reaffirms that custodial violence is a serious human rights violation

Importantly, the NHRC clarified that payment of compensation does not absolve the State or police officials from criminal accountability.

Human Rights, Accountability, and State Responsibility

The right to life under Article 21 includes the right to live with dignity and freedom from torture. When police—entrusted with enforcing the law—become perpetrators of violence, the foundations of the rule of law are shaken.

This case reflects a troubling pattern:

  • Delayed compliance with NHRC directions

  • Administrative silence

  • Accountability reduced to paperwork

Conclusion

The custodial death of Kalicharan Kewat is not an isolated tragedy but a symptom of deeper systemic failures. While the NHRC’s intervention affirms the victim’s right to justice, true justice remains incomplete unless:

  • Responsible police officials are prosecuted

  • Institutional safeguards against custodial torture are strengthened

  • State authorities move beyond symbolic compliance

The Government of Jharkhand must demonstrate that human rights violations will not be met with delay, denial, or indifference.

🔗 Related Blog Link:




Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Report on Health Camp for Survivors of Torture and Their Families

Defending Truth Under Fire: The Case of Yambem Laba, NHRC’s Intervention, and the Ongoing Battle for Human Rights in Manipur

“The Station House Officer said: ‘We will not let your son become an MBBS doctor.’”