“Custodial deaths” are one the most serious human rights problems in India, showing a very thin line between state power and constitutional respect. Despite having many legal safeguards, judicial pronouncements, and international obligations, the happening of deaths in police and judicial custody shows that there is a failure in our system. This research paper will investigate the crisis of transparency that surrounds custodial deaths, exploring how institutional secrecy, poor enforcement, and cultures of impunity undermines the constitutional guarantee of Article 21. Through the judicial interpretation from Nilabati Behera to D.K. Basu and many other cases, the analysis underscores the evolving jurisprudence that transformed compensation, and procedural safeguards into enforceable rights. The paper further demonstrates India’s reluctance to adopt the UN Convention Against Torture within the larger contradiction of constitutional guarantee without legislative commitment. The analysis emphasizes the structural flaws like overcrowded prisons, poor medical treatment, skewed investigations, and disproportionate targeting of marginalized groups which exacerbate the problem even more. While there are several protocols and reliefs has prescribed by the National Human Rights Commission but its limited mandate and reliance on state authorities often undermine its accountability to monetary compensation than deterrence. In respond to these enduring gaps, the article calls for an integrated reform agenda, passing a specific anti-torture law, enhancing independent oversight, responsibly utilizing technology, guaranteeing medical transparency, and prioritizing victims’ rights. Justice behind bars, thus, is not just about averting fatalities but about upholding the State’s constitutional duty to maintain dignity, transparency, and faith in the rule of law.