Police Custody Conditions: Supreme Court Balances Investigation Rights with Constitutional Safeguards

Case Snapshot

Case Name: State of Andhra Pradesh v. Suda Suresh Veera Venkata Naga Raju

Citation: 2026 INSC 744

Bench: Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Sandeep Mehta

Date of Judgment: July 27, 2026

Area of Law: Criminal Law, Constitutional Law, Police Custody/Remand, Criminal Procedure

Judgment in Brief

The Supreme Court allowed the State's appeal and modified the conditions imposed by the Trial Court and the High Court regarding police custody of a police officer accused in a custodial death case. The respondent-accused, an Inspector of Police, was charged in connection with the custodial death of an individual at Krishna Lanka Police Station, Vijayawada.

The Trial Court had granted police custody for eight days subject to stringent conditions, including confining the interrogation exclusively to Central Prison, Rajamahendravaram (approximately 160 kilometers away), mandating continuous videography of every movement including transit, and permitting a lawyer to remain present throughout the interrogation. The High Court partially modified the order but retained most conditions.

The Supreme Court held that while constitutional safeguards must be protected, excessive and unworkable conditions cannot be imposed that render custodial interrogation ineffective. The Court found that confining interrogation to a distant prison, requiring uninterrupted videography of transit, and mandating continuous lawyer presence exceeded the requirements of law. The Court modified the conditions to allow interrogation at the SIT's designated facility, retained videography of actual interrogation sessions (not transit), permitted lawyer presence only to observe (not intervene), and clarified the scope of Section 38 of the BNSS regarding the right to meet an advocate during interrogation.

Relevant Facts

The Crime: FIR No. 107 of 2026 was registered at Krishna Lanka Police Station, Vijayawada, relating to the custodial death of one Gade Sai Krishna on May 6, 2026. The deceased was apprehended by Task Force personnel at Markapur at 3:00 a.m. and brought to Krishna Lanka Police Station at 7:00 a.m. the same day, where he was entrusted to the respondent-accused (an Inspector of Police). The deceased was never produced before a Magistrate, and witnesses saw him with visible injuries at the police station.

Suppression of Facts: The respondent-accused suppressed the fact of the deceased's apprehension and custody during habeas corpus proceedings before the High Court. He was suspended on June 17, 2026.

Registration of FIR: On June 19, 2026, the deceased's mother lodged a complaint alleging illegal detention, custodial torture resulting in death, and disappearance of the body. Crime No. 107 of 2026 was registered for offences under Sections 103(1) (murder), 238(a) (causing disappearance of evidence), and 309(6) (kidnapping) of the BNS.

Special Investigation Team: On June 21, 2026, the Government constituted an SIT to investigate. The respondent was arrested on June 23, 2026, and remanded to judicial custody on June 24, 2026.

Application for Police Custody: On June 25, 2026, the prosecution filed a memo under Section 187 of the BNSS seeking twelve days police remand, citing the need to trace the deceased's body, identify co-accused, recover material evidence, and confront the accused.

Trial Court's Order: By order dated July 2, 2026, the learned II Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Vijayawada, granted eight days police custody subject to fifteen conditions, including:

• Confining interrogation to Central Prison, Rajamahendravaram (160 km away)

• Mandating continuous videography of all interrogation sessions

• Requiring uninterrupted videography of the accused's movements

• Permitting a lawyer to remain present throughout (within 10 feet, behind glass partition)

• Making officials jointly and severally responsible for the accused's safety

• Imposing a non-extendable outer limit on custody

High Court's Order: The High Court partially modified the order, allowing the SIT to take the accused to the scene of offences for recovery, extending the custody period to July 16, 2026, requiring videography of every movement from prison to Vijayawada and back, and retaining all other conditions.

State's Appeal: The State appealed to the Supreme Court, arguing that the conditions rendered the custodial interrogation ineffective and frustrated the investigation.

Issues Before the Court

1. Whether the conditions imposed by the Trial Court and modified by the High Court regarding police custody of the respondent-accused were legally sustainable and workable in pr

... Upgrade to a Premium Plan to view the full judgment.