SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
R.M. Lodha, CJI., Kurian Joseph, Rohinton Fali Nariman, JJ.
Bhim Singh - Petitioner
Versus
Union of India and others - Respondents
Writ Petition (Criminal) No. 310 of 2005 With W.P. (C) No. 341 of 2004 and W.P.(Crl.) No. 175 of 2005
Decided On : 05-09-2014
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - punishment of death - Parliament by Act 25 of 2005 - Process of consultation - Punishment of death - Blueprint/road-map for fast-tracking of criminal cases - Maximum period for which an under trial prisoner can be detained - Deportation of prisoner - Prays for time to place the same by way of an affidavit within three months reiterate that it is high time, positive steps are taken by Central Government in consultation with State Governments in fast tracking all types of criminal cases so that criminal justice is delivered timely and expeditiously - Held, No Objection by State Government to Central Government for deportation of prisoner - If it has decided not to challenge the discharge order – In that event, No Objection shall be positively sent within four weeks. On receipt of ‘No Objection, if any, from Government of Jammu and Kashmir, Central Government shall take steps for his deportation as early as possible and in no case not later than four weeks from the date of receipt of ‘No Objection - Professor, petitioner-in-person, invited our attention to the affidavit on behalf of Government of India by Mr. Vikas Srivastava in compliance of Order – Order accordingly.
ORDER :
1. On 01.08.2014, whereby we wanted to know from the learned Attorney General about Government of India's plan in fast-tracking criminal justice in the country, learned Attorney General on that day took time to have a comprehensive look at the problem and come out with a concrete proposal in this regard within four weeks.
2. Mr. Mukul Rohatgi, learned Attorney General submits that process of consultation with the State Governments for fast-tracking criminal justice has been commenced by the Central Government but the blueprint/road-map for fast-tracking of criminal cases shall take some time. He prays for time to place the same by way of an affidavit within three months.
3. We reiterate that it is high time, positive steps are taken by the Central Government in consultation with the State Governments in fast tracking all types of criminal cases so that criminal justice is delivered timely and expeditiously.
4. Learned Attorney General informs us that more than 50% of the prisoners in various jails are under-trial prisoners. Even many of them may have served maximum sentence prescribed under the law for the offences they have been charged with. The Parliament by Act 25 of 2005 amended Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 providing for maximum period for which an under-trial prisoner can be detained under any law not being an offence for which the punishment of death has been specified as one of the punishments. Section 436A reads as follows :-
Provided that the Court may, after hearing the Public Prosecutor and for reasons to be recorded by it in writing, order the continued detention of such person for a period longer than one-half of the said period or release him on bail instead of the personal bond with or without sureties:
Provided further that no such person shall in any case be detained during the period of investigation inquiry or trial for more than the maximum period of imprisonment provided for the said offence under that law.
Explanation. - In computing the period of detention under this section for granting bail the period of detention passed due to delay in proceeding caused by the accused shall be excluded.]"
5. Having given our thoughtful consideration to the legislative policy engrafted in Section 436A and large number of under-trial prisoners housed in the prisons, we are of the considered view that some order deserves to be passed by us so that the under-trial prisoners do not continue to be detained in prison beyond the maximum period provided under Section 436A.
6. We, accordingly, direct that jurisdictional Magistrate/Chief Judicial Magistrate/Sessions Judge shall hold one sitting in a week in each jail/prison for two months commencing from 1st October, 2014 for the purposes of effective implementation of 436A of the Code of Criminal Procedure. In its sittings in jail, the above judicial officers shall identify the under-trial prisoners who have completed half period of the maximum period or maximum period of imprisonment provided for the said offence under the law and after complying with the procedure prescribed under Section 436A pass an appropriate order in jail itself for release of such under-trial prisoners who fulfill the requirement of Section 436A for their release immediately. Such jurisdictional Magistrate/Chief Judicial Magistrate/Sessions Judge shall submit the report of each of such sitting to the Registrar General of the High Court and at the end of two months, the Registrar Ge
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding effect of the settlement between the parties, the waiver of the right to seek re-employment by the workmen, and the entitlement of the ....
A lockout is justified if it is declared in response to an illegal strike or a strike that is in breach of a settlement or award.
The combination of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of the weapon used, and forensic examination results can establish guilt in criminal cases, even based on circumstantial evidence.
The conviction of an accused person under Section 27(3) of the Arms Act is not permissible in law if the accused is also charged with committing murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court can enhance compensation based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and adjust the multiplier used by the Tribunal if found unjustified.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.