UN Human Rights Experts Accuse India of Systemic Police Brutality, Extrajudicial Killings and Widespread Custodial Torture

India presents itself as the world’s largest democracy. Yet behind this image lies a deeply troubling record of custodial deaths, alleged torture, encounter killings and institutional impunity. The recent warning issued by United Nations human rights experts is not an isolated criticism. It reflects years of documented data, official statistics and repeated failures of accountability.

The numbers are not small. They are not accidental. They point to a pattern that cannot be ignored.

Custodial Deaths Reveal a Disturbing Pattern

Custodial deaths remain one of the most serious indicators of police misconduct. According to official data published by India’s National Crime Records Bureau, more than 8,700 people died in custody between 2017 and 2022.

Table 1. Custodial Deaths in India

Year	Police Custody Deaths	Judicial Custody Deaths	Total Custodial Deaths
2019	85	1,775	1,860
2020	76	1,887	1,963
2021	100	1,912	2,012
2022	100+	1,995	2,095+

In 2022 alone more than 2,095 people died in custody. Over 100 of these deaths occurred in police custody where individuals were under direct police control.

Authorities frequently attribute judicial custody deaths to illness or natural causes. However overcrowded prisons, medical neglect and delayed treatment are systemic failures. A democracy cannot excuse preventable deaths under state supervision.

Even more alarming is the conviction rate. In custodial torture and death cases, convictions are often reported below 5 percent. This means that in more than 95 percent of cases, accountability is either weak or absent.

This is not justice. It is institutional protection.

Encounter Killings and the Culture of Force

India has witnessed a rise in so called encounter killings, especially in states like Uttar Pradesh and Assam. These incidents are officially described as armed exchanges. Human rights observers describe many of them as possible extrajudicial executions.

Table 2. Reported Police Encounters in Selected States

State	Period	Reported Encounters	Reported Deaths	Reported Injuries
Uttar Pradesh	2017 to 2023	10,000+	180+	5,000+
Assam	2021 to 2023	150+	50+	100+

Since 2017 Uttar Pradesh police have reported more than 10,000 encounters. More than 180 people were killed and over 5,000 injured. In Assam more than 50 people were killed in recent encounter incidents.

When thousands are injured and hundreds killed under similar circumstances, this is not random policing. It suggests a normalized use of lethal force.

Independent investigations into these killings are rare. Most inquiries remain internal. Without transparent external oversight, claims of self defense remain untested.

A system that kills first and investigates later cannot claim moral authority.

Minorities Bear a Disproportionate Burden

India’s prison data exposes another troubling reality. Muslims, Dalits and Adivasis are overrepresented in prisons compared to their share in the general population.

Table 3. Prison Population by Community

Community	Share of General Population	Share of Prison Population
Muslims	14 percent	18 to 20 percent
Scheduled Castes	16 percent	21 percent
Scheduled Tribes	8 percent	10 percent

Muslims form about 14 percent of the population but account for up to 20 percent of prisoners. Scheduled Castes represent about 16 percent of the population but around 21 percent of inmates.

This disproportion raises serious questions about policing bias, selective targeting and structural discrimination. A justice system that disproportionately confines marginalized communities risks losing its credibility.

Structural Weaknesses and Institutional Neglect

India’s policing crisis is also rooted in systemic weaknesses.

Table 4. Structural Indicators

Indicator	Status in India
Police to population ratio	Approximately 155 to 160 per 100,000
UN recommended ratio	222 per 100,000
Vacancy rate in police forces	Around 20 to 25 percent in many states
Standalone anti torture law	Not enacted
UN Convention Against Torture	Signed but not ratified

India’s police to population ratio stands at about 155 to 160 per 100,000, well below the UN recommended 222 per 100,000. Vacancy rates in some states reach 25 percent.

India signed the United Nations Convention Against Torture in 1997 but has not ratified it even after more than two decades. There is still no standalone anti torture law.

This delay is not procedural. It reflects political unwillingness to legally bind law enforcement to stricter standards.

Overcrowded Prisons and Endless Detention

Overcrowding deepens the crisis.

Table 5. Prison Occupancy

Indicator	Status
National average occupancy rate	Over 120 percent
Undertrial prisoners	Around 75 percent of total inmates

Prisons operate at over 120 percent capacity. Around 75 percent of inmates are under trial prisoners who have not been convicted.

This means thousands remain imprisoned for years without final judgment. Prolonged detention becomes punishment without trial.

Legal Safeguards Ignored

In 1997 India’s Supreme Court issued mandatory guidelines to prevent custodial abuse. These included medical examinations, arrest memos and family notification.

Yet implementation remains inconsistent. Complaints of torture continue. Independent oversight remains weak.

The Unlawful Activities Prevention Act has also been criticized. Conviction rates under the law are often reported below 5 percent, yet arrests and long pre trial detentions continue.

Low conviction rates combined with long detention periods suggest a system that punishes through process rather than proof.

A Democracy Under Scrutiny

United Nations experts have warned that the pattern of violence appears systemic rather than isolated. They have called for urgent independent investigations and modernization of policing practices.

India’s global image as a democratic power stands in tension with these realities. When custodial deaths exceed 2,000 in a single year and encounter killings number in the hundreds, the issue is not perception. It is accountability.

The Moral and Political Cost

Every custodial death represents a human life lost under state authority. Every alleged torture case erodes trust. Every extrajudicial killing weakens the rule of law.

A democracy cannot selectively apply human rights. It cannot ignore disproportionate incarceration. It cannot delay ratifying international conventions for decades.

Reform requires independent investigations, strong prosecution of guilty officers, ratification of anti torture conventions and genuine oversight mechanisms.

Until then, the data speaks clearly. The pattern is persistent. The accountability is weak. And the cost is carried by the most vulnerable. India must decide whether it will protect its institutions or protect its people.