SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2018 Supreme(SC) 472

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
MADAN B. LOKUR, DEEPAK GUPTA, JJ.
RE-INHUMAN CONDITIONS IN 1382 PRISONS
Writ Petition (Civil) No. 406 of 2013
Decided On : 08-05-2018

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Mr. Gaurav Agrawal
For the Respondent: Mr. A.N.S. Nadkarni, Ms. Vibha Dutta Makhija, Mr. R.M. Bajaj, Ms. Binu Tamta, Mr. R. Bala, Ms. Sushma Suri, Mr. B.K. Prasad, Ms. Sushma Manchanda, Mr. M.K. Maroria, Ms. Aarti Sharma, Mr. Santosh Kr. Vishwakarma, Mr. B.V. Balaram Das
For the State of Andhra Pradesh : Mr. Guntur Prabhakar, Ms. Prerna Singh, Mr. Gautam Prabhakar
For the State of Assam : Mr. Shuvodeep Roy, Mr. Sayooj Mohandas M.
For the State of Bihar : Mr. M. Shoeb Alam, Ms. Fauzia Shakil, Mr. Ujjwal Singh, Mr. Mojahid Karim Khan
For the State of Chhattisgarh : Mr. Atul Jha, Mr. Sandeep Jha, Mr. Dharmendra Kumar Sinha
For the State of Goa : Mr. Anshuman Srivastava, Mr. S.S. Rebello, Apoorva Bhumesh
For the State of Gujarat : Ms. Hemantika Wahi, Ms. Mamta Singh, Ms. Vishakha, Ms. Shodhika Sharma, Ms. Pallavi Baghel
For the State of H.P. : Mr. Ajay Marwah, Mr. Mool Singh
For the State of Haryana : Mr. B.K. Satija, Mr. Sanjay Kr. Visen
For the State of J&K : Mr. M. Shoeb Alam, Ms. Fauzia Shakil, Mr. Ujjwal Singh, Mr. Mojahid Karim Khan
For the State of Jharkhand : Mr. Tapesh Kumar Singh, Mohd. Waquas, Mr. Aditya Pratap Singh
For the State of Karnataka : Mr. V.N. Raghupathy, Mr. Parikshit P. Angadi
For the State of Kerala : Mr. C.K. Sasi
For the State of Madhya Pradesh : Mr. Saurabh Mishra, Mr. Arjun Garg
For the State of Maharashtra : Mr. Mahaling Pandarge, Mr. Nishant R. Katneshwarkar
For the State of Manipur : Mr. Leishangthem Roshmani KH., Ms. Maibam Babina
For the State of Meghalaya : Mr. Ranjan Mukherjee, Mr. Daniel Stone Lyngdoh, Mr. K.V. Kharlyngdoh
For the State of Mizoram : Mr. K.N. Madhusoodhanan, Ms. Nitya Madhusoodhanan, Mr. T.G. Narayanan Nair
For the State of Nagaland : Mrs. K. Enatoli Sema, Mr. Edward Belho, Mr. Amit Kumar Singh, Mr. K. Luikang Michael, Mr. Z.H. Isaac Haiding
For the State of Odisha : Ms. Anindita Pujari, Ms. Kavita Bhardwaj, Mr. Ashok Panigrahi
For the State of Punjab : Ms. Uttara Babbar, Ms. Akanksha Choudhary, Ms. Bhavana Duhoon
For the State of Rajasthan : Mr. S.S. Shamshery, Mr. Amit Sharma, Mr. Sandeep Singh, Mr. Ankit Raj, Ms. Ruchi Kohli, Ms. Pragati Neekhra, Sikkim Ms. Aruna Mathur, Mr. Avneesh Arputham, Ms. Anuradha Arputham, Ms. Simran Jeet, for M/s Arputham Aruna & Co.
For the State of Tripura : Mr. Shuvodeep Roy, Mr. Rituraj Biswas
For the State of Tamil Nadu : Mr. M. Yogesh Kanna, Ms. Sujatha Bagadhi
For the State of Uttar Pradesh : Ms. Aishwarya Bhati, Mr. Garvesh Kabra
For the State of Uttarakhand : Ms. Rachana Srivastava, Ms. Monika, Ms. Sudipta
For the State of West Bengal : Mr. Suhaan Mukerji, Mr. Harsh Hiroo Gusahanbi, Mr. Vishal Prasad, Ms. Astha Sharma, Mr. Amjid Maqbool, Mr. Amit Verma
For the PLR Chambers and Co. A&N Islands : Mr. Bhupesh Narula, Mr. K.V. Jagdishvaran, Mrs. G. Indira
For the State of Chandigarh : Mr. M.S. Doabia, Mr. S.S. Rawat
For the State of Puducherry : Mr. V.G. Pragasam, Mr. S. Prabu Ramasubramanian, Mr. S. Manuraj, Mr. T.N. Rama Rao, Mr. Hitesh Kumar Sharma, Mr. T. Veera Reddy, Ms. Ritu Kumar, Ms. Pragya Singh, Mr. Satya Mitra, Mr. Kamal Mohan Gupta, Mr. P. Venkat Reddy, Mr. Prashant Kr. Tyagi, for M/s. Venkat Palwai Law Associates 26542/18 Mr. Pukhrambam Ramesh Kumar, Mr. Himanshu Agarwal, Mr. Yash S. Vijay

The main legal point established in the judgment is the need for each High Court to address the identified issues in prison administration as suo moto writ petitions.

Headnote:

Prison Reforms - Issues in Prison Administration - The court addressed various issues related to prison administration including under trial review committee, overcrowding in prisons, vacancies in prison staff, women prisoners and their children, training manuals for prison officers, and open prisons.

Fact of the Case:

The court addressed several issues related to prison administration including under trial review committee, overcrowding in prisons, vacancies in prison staff, women prisoners and their children, training manuals for prison officers, and open prisons.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that there were serious issues in the prison administration that needed to be addressed by each High Court independently and requested the Chief Justice of every High Court to take up these matters as suo moto writ petitions.

Issues: The issues addressed by the court included under trial review committee, overcrowding in prisons, vacancies in prison staff, women prisoners and their children, training manuals for prison officers, and open prisons.

Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the need for each High Court to take up the identified issues as suo moto writ petitions and requested necessary steps to be taken by the Registrar General of every High Court.

Final Decision: The court listed the matter for further consideration on 2nd August, 2018.

ORDER :

We have seen the Note of Hearing submitted by learned amicus curiae.

We have heard learned amicus curiae as well as learned Additional Solicitor General and other learned counsel.

There are six issues for consideration today:

1. Under Trial Review Committee

It is stated by Mr. Surinder S. Rathi, Director, NALSA that the Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) for Under Trial Review Committee is ready.

Learned amicus curiae says that he will look into it and perhaps have some further discussion with NALSA.

In any event, the SOP will be finalized on or before 30th June, 2018.

As soon as the SOP is finalized, it should be circulated to all the District Judges and Under Trial Review Committees for implementation.

If and when there are some constraints in the implementation of the SOP, it should be brought to the notice of NALSA so that necessary or corrective measures can be taken.

No further orders are required to be passed on this issue.

We compliment Mr. Rathi and others in NALSA associated in the drafting of the SOP and place on record our appreciation for their efforts.

2. Overcrowding in Prisons

It appears from the Note given by learned amicus curiae that the issue of overcrowding in prisons is not being taken seriously by the prison authorities. There are several prisons where the overcrowding is well beyond 100% and in some cases it exceeds 150%.

In our opinion, this matter should be considered by each High Court independently with the assistance of the State Legal Services Authority/ High Court Legal Services Committee so that there is some sanity in the overcrowding in prisons since it involves violation of human rights.

Under the circumstances, we request the Chief Justice of every High Court to take up the issue of overcrowding in prisons as a suo moto writ petition.

The Secretary General should send a copy of this order to the Registrar General of every High Court for necessary steps in this regard and report back to us.

3. Vacancies in the prisons staff

From the Note of learned amicus curiae, we find that once again there is little interest being shown by the prison authorities and the State Governments to recruit staff in prisons. This, of course, has its own impact on prison administration.

Looking to the Note of learned amicus curiae, we are of opinion that this matter should also be taken up by each High Court.

Accordingly, we request the Chief Justice of every High Court to take up this matter as a suo moto writ petition.

The Secretary General should send a copy of this order to the Registrar General of every High Court for necessary steps in this regard and report back to us.

4. Women prisoners and their children

Learned Additional Solicitor General informs us that the Ministry of Women and Child Development, Government of India is conducting a study through the National Commission for Women and the National Law University, Delhi on women prisoners and their children. He says that as per his information the Study will be completed by 30th June, 2018 and the Ministry would thereafter like to look into the Study and take necessary steps. He further says that the consideration will take about 2 or 3 weeks.

For this purpose, list the matter on 2nd August, 2018.

5. Training Manuals

The Bureau of Police Research and Development has prepared some training manuals for the prison officers and prison warders.

We expect the National Police Academy and the State Police Academies to take advantage of the excellent effort put in by the Bureau of Police Research and Development and conduct training courses appropriately.

As and when the Bureau of Police Research and Development feels it necessary to prepare other training manuals for the benefit of the prison staff, it is, of course, at liberty to do so, but should bring it to the notice of learned amicus curiae for information.

No further orders are required to be passed on this issue.

6. Open Prisons

It is stated by learned Additional Solicitor General that steps are being taken to encourage setting u




Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top