Published Paper Details:

Custodial violence is one of the most persistent and disturbing issues to the rule of law, safeguarding human rights, and the sanctity of constitutional governance. The issue of torture, deaths, and abuse within the confines of custody still occurs even with constitutional protections, statutory bans, and judicial policies, to demonstrate how weak the state accountability systems remain. This paper gives a comparative law study on the issue of custodial violence and state responsibility in the United States and India, two democracies that, though having different constitutional traditions, share similarities of individual rights and due process. Using constitutional provisions, statutory frameworks and case law leading judicial precedents, the paper will explore how each jurisdiction conceptualises and applies state responsibility to custodial abuse. It also determines the efficiency of domestic remedy, checks and balances on compliance with international human rights duties through instruments like the United Nations Convention against Torture. The study provides systemic deficits, institutional cultures and enforcement asymmetries as the drivers of impunity through doctrinal, comparative and empirical lenses. The paper is concluded by recommendations on legal and policy changes that can be made to increase accountability, promote transparency and make custodial environments indicative of democratic principles of dignity, justice and inviolability of human life.