SC orders CBI probe into J&K cop’s custodial torture

Srinagar, July 21: In a major ruling that highlights the gravity of custodial violence and the need for institutional accountability, the Supreme Court of India on Monday ordered a probe by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) into the alleged custodial torture of Khursheed Ahmad Chohan, son of Late Ghulam Mustufa Chohan, resident of Abkote, Kupwara a police constable from Jammu and Kashmir. The court also quashed a criminal case filed against the victim and directed the Union Territory administration to pay him ₹50 lakh as compensation.The bench comprising Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta delivered a scathing judgment that condemned the treatment meted out to Chohan, who was allegedly subjected to brutal torture while being held at the Joint Interrogation Centre (JIC) in Kupwara.Terming the incident a “gross violation of fundamental rights”, the court held that the state had failed in its duty to protect the life and dignity of a citizen.Chohan, who was posted in Baramulla, had been summoned to the JIC on February 20, 2023, in connection with a narcotics-related inquiry. What followed, he alleged, was six days of illegal detention and inhuman torture by fellow police personnel. He suffered severe injuries including genital mutilation, electric shocks to sensitive areas, and abuse involving the use of chilli powder. The medical report from Srinagar’s SKIMS hospital confirmed grievous injuries, including the complete amputation of his testicles carried to the hospital in a plastic bag by a sub-inspector.Despite a complaint filed by his wife Rubina Aktar on March 1, 2023, police did not register any case against the accused. Instead, they filed a counter-FIR against Chohan under Section 309 of the IPC, accusing him of attempting suicide a charge the top court dismissed as “medically implausible and fabricated”.Justice Mehta, who authored the judgment, noted glaring contradictions in the state’s account. The bench pointed out that Chohan was summoned for questioning in a case that hadn’t even been formally registered at the time of his detention. “The suicide theory crumbles under scrutiny,” the court observed, adding that the injuries sustained clearly pointed to custodial torture and not self-inflicted harm.Slamming the Jammu and Kashmir High Court for refusing to intervene, the apex court cited the Lalita Kumari precedent, which makes it mandatory for police to register FIRs in cases involving cognizable offences.The judges said the refusal to lodge an FIR against the accused officers was a clear miscarriage of justice.In a big move, the court ordered the CBI to register a regular case within a week and to complete its investigation within 90 days. The CBI has also been asked to arrest the officers involved within a month and submit a status report to the court by November 10.Further, the CBI has been tasked with conducting a broader inquiry into systemic issues at the JIC Kupwara. This includes a review of CCTV footage, interrogation protocols, and whether structural failures enabled the culture of impunity. “The barbaric acts carried out in custody and the subsequent attempt to shield those responsible are deeply disturbing,” the court stated.In a firm message on state accountability, the court directed the J&K administration to pay ₹50 lakh to Chohan as interim compensation, adding that the amount would be recovered from the guilty officials after the inquiry. It also ordered initiation of departmental proceedings against those found responsible.The court relied on key constitutional precedents, including D.K. Basu vs State of West Bengal and Nilabati Behera vs State of Orissa, to assert that monetary compensation is a necessary remedy when the right to life and liberty is violated by state agents. “This court cannot allow the transformation of a torture victim into an accused through institutional deceit,” the judgment said.The next hearing in the case is scheduled for November 17, 2025.The ruling is expected to have far-reaching implications for custodial rights and may trigger structural reforms in interrogation practices, particularly in conflict-prone areas like Jammu and Kashmir