Back
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
B.R. GAVAI, K. V. VISWANATHAN, JJ.
Suhas Chakma – Petitioner
VERSUS
Union of India & Ors. – Respondents
Writ Petition No. 1082 of 2020
Decided On : 23-10-2024
Yes, arrested persons are entitled to early access to legal assistance to oppose remand applications and mount a defense against allegations, as this forms a critical component of ensuring fair treatment from the pre-arrest, arrest, and remand stages. (!) (!) (!)
This right is operationalized through a structured framework for pre-litigation assistance, where District Legal Services Authorities (DLSAs) must promptly depute lawyers upon receiving intimation of a request from the suspect or arrestee during interrogation at the police station. (!) Assigned legal aid lawyers are tasked with specific duties, including challenging arrests that violate statutory safeguards, expeditiously filing bail applications to oppose remand, keeping the client informed of case status, and seeking modifications to onerous bail conditions (such as excessive sureties) that could undermine the purpose of release. (!) (!) (!)
Legal Services Authorities at all levels are directed to diligently pursue and periodically review this framework to ensure its effective implementation, bridging gaps in awareness and access for indigent persons. (!) (!) Statistics demonstrate substantial utilization, with thousands of suspects receiving assistance at police stations pre-court production and during remand hearings, resulting in numerous bail grants. (!) This mechanism upholds the constitutional mandate that no one is denied justice due to economic or other disabilities, extending proactive support even before formal proceedings commence. (!) (!) (!)
JUDGMENT
K.V. Viswanathan, J.
Brief Facts:
1. The present Writ Petition, under Article 32 of the Constitution of India, was filed primarily for issuance an appropriate Writ, Order or direction directing the respondents Union of India, States and the Union Territories to ensure that no prisoner is subjected to torture, cruel, inhumane and degrading treatment or punishment because of living in overcrowded and unhygienic conditions in jail. It also espouses the cause that all persons deprived of their liberty are entitled to be treated with humanity, and with respect for the inherent dignity and a prayer was made for creating a permanent mechanism to decongest the overcrowded prisons.
2. When the Writ Petition came up for hearing on 22.04.2024, this Court appointed Shri Vijay Hansaria, learned Senior Advocate as Amicus Curiae. Thereafter, on 09.05.2024, Shri K. Parameshwar, learned Senior Advocate (as Amicus Curiae) and Ms. Rashmi Nandakumar, learned counsel for the National Legal Services Authority (NALSA) were requested to assist the Court alongside the already appointed Amicus Curiae. On that day Shri Vijay Hansaria, learned Amicus Curiae tendered to Court the format of a letter to be submitted by the Jail Visiting Lawyers (JVLs) regarding information to convicts on free legal aid. Ms. Rashmi Nandakumar, learned counsel was asked to take instructions from NALSA in this regard. Thereafter, in its order of 17.05.2024, broadly two issues were identified- one pertaining to Open Correctional Institutions and the other with regard to modalities for visitation by lawyers in jail so as to ensure free legal aid to the deserving prison inmates. On 17.05.2024, Ms. Rashmi Nandakumar, learned counsel informed the Court that the format of letter initially handed over by the learned Amicus has been slightly modified in consultation with NALSA and the said modified letter to be filled by the JVLs were taken on record and approved.
3. By a note submitted by learned counsel - Ms. Rashmi Nandakumar on 15.07.2024, it was set out that the letter, as approved in the order of 17.05.2024, was circulated by the NALSA to all the State Legal Services Authorities (SLSAs) and a direction was issued to them to collate the data received by JVLs and compile the information as per the format prescribed by NALSA. Details of responses received till 15th July, 2024 were also set out and directions were issued to other States to file their responses. When the matter was taken up on 09.09.2024, a detailed note dated 06.09.2024 was placed on record by Ms. Rashmi Nandakumar, learned counsel on the aspect of access to free legal aid for the deserving prison inmates. This judgment deals with the aspect of access to free legal aid for prison inmates. The issue of “Open Correctional Institutions” will be heard and considered separately by the Court.
4. We have heard Mr. Vijay Hansaria learned Amicus Curiate and Ms. Rashmi Nandakumar, learned counsel. We have considered the detailed note submitted by the NALSA.
Constitutional Goal
5. Article 39-A of the Directive Principles of State Policy which talks of equal justice and free legal aid reads as under:
39-A. Equal justice and free legal aid.-
The State shall secure that the operation of the legal system promotes justice, on a basis of equal opportunity, and shall, in particular, provide free legal aid, by suitable legislation or schemes or in any other way, to ensure that opportunities for securing justice are not denied to any citizen by reason of economic or other disabilities.
Relevant Judicial Pronouncements
6. This Court in Hussainara Khatoon and Others (IV) v. Home Secretary, State of Bihar, Patna (1980) 1 SCC 98, held as under:
The right to free legal aid is a fundamental right under Article 21, ensuring that no prisoner is denied legal representation due to poverty or ignorance.
The right to legal aid is essential for ensuring timely access to bail for marginalized prisoners, emphasizing the constitutional obligation to uphold personal liberty.
Grant of bail for non-compliance of mandate of Sections 41 and 41-A of Cr.P.C., 1973. – Directions contained in Paras 100.2, 100.4, 100.7 of Satender Kumar Antil v. Central Bureau of Investigation, (....
Legal aid is a constitutional right linked to Articles 21 and 39A, mandating the State to ensure access to justice by providing timely legal representation, particularly to marginalized individuals.
The victim is not a necessary party to a Criminal Appeal from conviction for offences against woman or child, punishable under provisions of the IPC or POCSO Act. No such appeal would be defective in....
The court emphasized the necessity of effective implementation of judicial technology and timely execution of court processes to enhance efficiency in the judicial system.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
