2018 Supreme(SC) 472
MADAN B.LOKUR, DEEPAK GUPTA
RE-INHUMAN CONDITIONS IN 1382 PRISONS – Appellant
Versus
. – Respondent
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
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 priso
Click Here to Read the rest of this document
Back
