The Evidence Trap: Establishing Custodial Torture And India’s Accountability Burden

Custodial torture violates constitutional guaranties under Article 21 and is an ingrained systemic failure within the Indian criminal justice system. (Anon., 1950) This paper explores the "evidence trap" an unequal legal situation in which the victim bears the burden of proving custodial torture beyond a reasonable doubt while the police maintain exclusive territorial control over the institutional machinery that produces, records, and preserves corresponding evidence. This study shows through a doctrinal analysis of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 (BSA), the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS), and the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS) that Section 109 BSA is insufficient to break lock-up secrecy if the Law Commission's proposed Section 114B presumption is left out. (India, 1985) (india, 1994) (Adhiniyam, 2023) (Sanhita, 2023) At the same time, Section 63 BSA electronic certification obstacles, forensic deference, and infrastructure sabotage neutralize medical examinations under Section 53 BNSS and CCTV mandates under Paramvir Singh Saini. (Adhiniyam, 2023) (Anon., 2023) (Paramvir Singh Saini v Balljit Singh & Ors, 2021) The system achieves a conviction rate below two percent, which turns constitutional remedies under Articles 32 and 226 into a compensatory mechanism that replaces individual criminal liability with state monetary solatium. (Anon., 1950) (series, 2004) This is made worse by station diary falsification, compromised witness protection, and executive sanction barriers under Section 218 BNSS. (Anon., 2023)