Complaint to Karnataka State Human Rights Commission regarding illegal detention, custodial torture, denial of medical care and custodial death

Dec 22, 2025
By PUCL-Karnataka and Association of Prisoners Families for Justice (APFJ)

  1.     The People’s Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL) and Association of Prisoners’ Families for Justice (APFJ) jointly submit this complaint seeking the intervention of the Karnataka State Human Rights Commission concerning the illegal detention, custodial torture, denial of medical care, and subsequent custodial death of Mr. Darshan alias Singamalai, a young man aged 23 years, belonging to a Scheduled Caste community, who died following police custody and transfer to a private rehabilitation centre.He was married and is survived by a two-year-old daughter.
  2. PUCL is a civil liberties organisation with over four decades of engagement in the protection of constitutional rights and human dignity.
  3. APFJ, an Association of Prisoners Families for Justice, working predominantly with prisoners and their families, The Association of Prisoners’ Families for Justice (APFJ) is a grassroots initiative committed to safeguarding the rights and dignity of families affected by incarceration in India.
  4. Through this complaint, PUCL & APFJ bring to the Commission’s attention grave violations of Articles 21 and 22 of the Constitution of India, Supreme Court guidelines on arrest and detention, and binding human rights norms governing custodial conduct.

BRIEF FACTS

  1. In the early hours of 12 November 2025, around 1:30 AM, Mr. Darshan was sitting outside his residence in Vivek Nagar when two police personnel arrived—one in uniform and another in civilian clothes. Without issuing any notice or explaining the grounds of action, they began assaulting him in public. These officers were later identified as Pavan Police, Police Inspector attached to Vivek Nagar Police Station, and two unidentified constables.
  2. When Darshan’s mother, Adilakshmi, and his brother Ajith questioned the assault, the police claimed that Darshan had intimidated Zomato delivery workers with a stick. Despite repeated pleas, Darshan was forcibly taken on a police motorcycle to Vivek Nagar Police Station. According to his mother, he was subsequently beaten inside the police station with lathis and pipes.
  3. On 13 November 2025, Adilakshmi visited the police station around 1:30 PM and requested the release of her son. Pavan informed her that the Inspector was not present and asked her to leave. She returned again between 4:00 and 5:00 PM the same day, but was denied permission to meet Darshan.
  4. On 14 November 2025, around 6:30 PM, Adilakshmi met the Inspector of Vivek Nagar Police Station. The Inspector categorically refused to release Darshan, threatened to book him in a serious case, and directed her to leave. When Adilakshmi pleaded that she would admit her son to a rehabilitation centre, the Inspector rejected the request. Even when she suggested that the police themselves could arrange rehabilitation, the Inspector refused.
  5. On 15 November 2025, around 3:00 PM, Pavan called Adilakshmi and stated that the Inspector had now agreed to send Darshan to a rehabilitation centre. Pavan demanded ₹7,500, claiming this was the negotiated rehabilitation fee. At around 4:30 PM, when Adilakshmi reached the police station with the money, she was asked to wait. From a distance, she saw Darshan inside the lock-up. Darshan told her that he was unable to walk and that he had been beaten again, particularly on his legs.
  6. Later that evening, around 8:30 PM, a vehicle from Unity Foundation Rehabilitation Centre, located near Madanayakanahalli, arrived at the police station. When the rehabilitation staff questioned Darshan about his inability to walk, Pavan instructed him to falsely state that he had fallen from a bike. With assistance, Darshan was made to walk to the vehicle.
  7. The Inspector imposed conditions that Darshan should not be released from the rehabilitation centre for six months, that the family must seek police permission thereafter, and that all expenses must be borne by the family. Adilakshmi paid ₹2,500 as admission fees. A photograph of Darshan with his mother was taken by Pavan in front of the rehabilitation vehicle. Darshan was taken to the rehabilitation centre at around 9:00 PM.
  8. Between 15 November and 26 November 2025, Adilakshmi contacted the rehabilitation centre daily. She was repeatedly informed that Darshan was recovering and that his injuries were reducing.
  9. On 26 November 2025, Darshan’s father, Gopi, received a call from the rehabilitation centre stating that Darshan had developed breathing difficulties and had died. The family rushed to Vivek Nagar Police Station, where the Inspector directed them to go to the rehabilitation centre, stating he would come later.
  10. At the rehabilitation centre, the family was not given any clear explanation. They were subsequently directed to Nelamangala Government Hospital, where the doctor informed them that Darshan was already dead when brought to the hospital. When the family saw Darshan’s body, they noticed extensive injuries, including bruises on the chest, swelling of both hands, visible beating marks on the back, swollen legs and feet, and a wound on the shin.
  11. The family was directed through multiple police stations before Madanayakanahalli Police Station registered a UDR under Section 194(3)(iv) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. Due to the severity of injuries, the body was shifted to Victoria Hospital, Bengaluru, where a post-mortem was conducted on 27 November 2025. On 28 November 2025, a second post-mortem was conducted by a doctor.
  12. This case received media attention immediately thereafter. On 28/11/2025, national media outlet NDTV and the Deccan Herald reported the incident of custodial death, and on 29/11/2025, The Hindu also carried news reports concerning the said custodial death case.
  13. As per the guidelines issued by the National Human Rights Commission dated 14/02/2019, and the same guidelines having been implemented by the Karnataka State Human Rights Commission on 27 September 2024, in cases of custodial death, post-mortem must be conducted by three doctors from three different medical institutions. The same has been violated in the present case, as the post-mortem conducted on 27/11/2025 does not comply with these mandatory requirements. A copy of the guidelines issued by the Karnataka State Human Rights Commission is annexed as Annexure-A, and the post-mortem report dated 27/11/2025 is annexed as Annexure-B.
  14. The accused police personals filed an application for anticipatory bail for the special court Bangalore Rural Court for SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. Notice was issued to the victim family. Adilakshmi appeared before the court and vehemently submitted that the bail must not be granted to the accused persons. Further, a submission was made that they had been paid around 9 lakhs. Further, the case has been transferred to the CID for investigation. Interestingly, the mother and wife who were with us during the fact finding and the press meet has stopped communicating and have vocally said that they do not wish to take the case forward and as our suspicion grew shockingly the accused police officers have withdrawn their anticipatory bail application on 08/12/2025 in Crl Misc. No. 2423/25 from the Special Court. An action unheard of in the past. We believe that the CID, accused police persons with their influence have coerced the victim’s family to not pursue justice for the deceased. Despite there by strong evidence in the nature of postmortem report and the illegal custody, custodial torture and custodial death, we anticipate that the case may be closed against the accused police personals.

Prayer

In view of the above, PUCL& APFJ respectfully requests the Karnataka State Human Rights Commission to:

 

  1. Call for magisterial inquiry report, post-mortem, inquest and medical records under Section 196 BNSS, 2023.
  2. Secure and examine CCTV footage from Vivek Nagar Police Station and Unity Foundation Rehabilitation Centre.
  3. Investigate the role of the Inspector, two constables including Police Pavan, the rehabilitation centre, and the present investigation team from theCID for dereliction of duty.
  4. Recommend the Government of Karnataka to transfer the investigation in Crime No.0999/2025 to a Special Investigation Team under the supervision of Sitting High Court Judge of the Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka.
  5. Recommend departmental, criminal, and contempt proceedings against responsible officials.
  6. Issue directions to prevent the misuse of rehabilitation centres as substitutes for lawful custody, custodial torture and medical care.
  7. Issue direction to display the rights of accused persons in all police stations both Kannada and English, including information on whom to approach in case of custodial torture.
  8. Direct the immediate arrest of the accused persons.
  9. Direct consideration of the violations of the National Human Rights Commission guidelines dated 14/02/2019, as adopted by the Karnataka State Human Rights Commission on 27/09/2024, in relation to the conduct of post-mortem in custodial death cases, as evidenced by Annexure-A and Annexure-B, and issue appropriate directions for accountability and corrective action.
  10. Direct the Police department to pay 50 lakh compensation to the family and social welfare department to provide house, land and pension as per rule 12(4) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Rules, 2016.

This complaint is submitted in the interest of justice, accountability, and the protection of constitutional rights of the most vulnerable.