Context

The Rajasthan High Court recently condemned the police practice of publicly parading arrestees and circulating their photographs on social media, terming it “institutional humiliation.” The Court directed the authorities to immediately remove such photographs within 24 hours and to implement safeguards to prevent the recurrence of such practices. The case arose after multiple petitions reported that arrestees were photographed in humiliating conditions and that their images were widely circulated through social media platforms and newspapers.

Key Highlights of the Court Judgment:

1. Right to Dignity under Article 21

• • • The Court emphasised that Article 21 of the Constitution guarantees not only the right to life but also the right to live with dignity, honour, and self-respect.
    • Arrest does not suspend fundamental human rights; accused persons continue to enjoy constitutional protections until proven guilty.

2. Institutional Humiliation Defined

• • • Forcing arrestees to sit at police station entrances, partially disrobing them, photographing them, and circulating these images amounts to institutional humiliation.
    • Such actions can cause irreparable damage to an individual’s reputation, social standing, and psychological well-being, even if the accused is subsequently acquitted.

3. Legal and Constitutional Violations

• • • No provision under the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), the Police Act, or the Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita authorises such practices.
    • The Court described these actions as arbitrary and illegal, reflecting unbridled caprice and undermining the rule of law and constitutional morality.

4. Directions to Authorities

• • • Immediate removal of photographs and related content from all web portals, social media platforms, and newspapers.
    • Submission of affidavits and compliance reports by the Superintendent of Police, Jaisalmer, and the Commissioner of Police, Jodhpur.
    • Implementation of institutional safeguards to prevent future violations.

5. Impact on Vulnerable Groups

• • • Unmarried women and young individuals are particularly vulnerable to social stigma, adverse marital consequences, and psychological trauma.
    • The judgment underscores the need for sensitive and humane handling of accused persons, especially prior to judicial adjudication.

Significance:

1. Strengthening Fundamental Rights

• • • Reinforces that the rights to dignity, honour, and privacy remain intact throughout criminal proceedings.
    • Upholds the presumption of innocence, a foundational principle of the criminal justice system.

2. Digital Age Implications

• • • Addresses the dangers posed by digital dissemination of sensitive content, recognising the permanent and far-reaching nature of online humiliation.
    • Marks a significant step toward ethical policing and responsible digital governance.

3. Institutional Accountability

• • • Holds police authorities accountable for human rights violations, prioritising the rule of law over arbitrary exercise of power.
    • Sets a precedent for other states to review and reform policing practices relating to the treatment of arrestees.

Conclusion:

The Rajasthan High Court’s judgment highlights the critical intersection of criminal law, human rights, and digital ethics, reaffirming that constitutional protections extend well beyond the courtroom. By categorising the practice as institutional humiliation, the Court has sent a strong message against the misuse of police powers and the dangers of public shaming in the digital era.