Supreme Court to consider if police can interrogate accused without presence of a lawyer
Court seeks Union government’s response on PIL seeking constitutional right to legal counsel during custody
The Supreme Court has issued notice to the Union government on a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) demanding recognition of a right for individuals to have legal counsel present during police interrogations, both custodial and pre-custodial. The bench of Chief Justice BR Gavai and Justice K Vinod Chandran is hearing the petition filed by practising lawyers, represented by Senior Advocate Menaka Guruswamy.
The petition contends that the current discretionary practice of barring lawyers during interrogation fosters coercion, violates Article 20(3) (right against self-incrimination), Article 21 (right to life and liberty), and Article 22(1) (right to legal consultation) of the Constitution. It highlights that under existing laws like Section 41D of the CrPC and equivalent provisions in the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, suspects may only “meet” their lawyers briefly but don’t have a continuous right to counsel during questioning.
The plea underscores reports of compelled testimony, including findings from the National Human Rights Commission, and references international precedents like Miranda v. Arizona and Salduz v. Turkey affirming the fundamental necessity of counsel during police interrogations. It also urges the Court to declare this right mandatory, seek video-recorded interrogations, rights notifications, and judicial oversight of any exceptions.
The case raises crucial questions about safeguarding fair trial rights and preventing custodial torture or abuse in India’s criminal justice system.