( 1 ) THESE two Public Interest Litigation cases may conveniently be disposed of by a common order as they involve same questions of fact and law. An Advocate, who is the President of A. P. Prison Reforms and Legal Aid Committee, filed W. P. No. 32039 of 1998. He prayed for a direction to the State Government to appoint a High level Commission headed by a sitting or retired High Court Judge, to visit and inspect all the prisons in the State and submit a report concerning the condition of prisons and prisoners with suggestions as to remedial measures, and to direct the state Government to provide proper accommodation and sufficient vehicles and female police escort to transport female prisoners for the purpose of production in the trial Courts, and such other related prayers.

( 2 ) W. P. NO. 6919 of 1999 is filed by a journalist and Social Worker praying for a declaration that the action of the respondents viz. , Government of Andhra pradesh, Director General of Police, and the inspector General of Prisons, in not producing the various Under Trial prisoners (UT prisoners for brevity), before the trial Courts as unconstitutional and for other appropriate directions.

( 3 ) IN W. P. No. 6919 of 1999, the petitioner states that, as a journalist, he came to be interested in the UT prisoners, who remained lodged in prisons without being produced before the concerned Courts for want of police escort. The cases are being adjourned from time to time for non-production of the UT prisoners. Therefore, the petitioner addressed a letter to the 2nd respondent on 30-1-1999 to know the response of the respondents. The 2nd respondent by letter dated 10-2-1999 informed the petitioner that the State Level review Committee for UT prisoners in its meeting held on 21-8-1998 proposed to create additional police force to perform the escort duty, and that the decision of the government in that behalf is awaited, and that for want of police escort, the UT prisoners could not be produced before the courts.

( 4 ) THE Additional Inspector General of prisons, filed counter-affidavit on behalf of the 2nd respondent inter alia stating that as on 3-7-1999, there are 9,797 UT prisoners in the State, constituting 70 to 80% of the total prison population, which are over-populated. As per Rule 10 (i) of the Andhra pradesh Prisoners (Attendance in Courts) rules, 1977, it is the duty of the Department of Police to provide escort to the prisoners attending the Courts. As and when the prisoners are required to be produced before the Court, the Superintendent of prisons, requests the District/local/city police to provide police escort. Due to inadequate strength of police escort, the prisoners could not be produced in the courts at all times on the dates of hearing. For the twin cities of hyderabad-Secunderabad, the Government sanctioned three platoons of armed police, which itself is not sufficient to produce all the prisoners in the Central Prisons and jails in twin cities, resulting in non-production of the UT prisoners in the Courts. The counter- affidavit of the 2nd respondent also states that the State Level Review Committee for ut prisoners, consisting of high officials in its meeting held on 21-8-1998 visualized the problem and recommended to create seven additional platoons of police, one each at the Central Prisons of Cuddapah, rajahmundry, Viajayawada and Warangal and three District Jails at Guntur, Nellore and Vijayawada. Accordingly, the department of Prisons sent proposals to the government for sanctioning the said additional platoons at a total cost of Rs. 3. 80 crores, and that orders of the Government in that behalf are awaited.

( 5 ) THE 1st respondent filed counter-affidavit through its Principal Secretary to government in Home Department. While, reiterating the averments, which were already made by the 2nd respondent, the 1st respondent states that with a view to reduce the over-crowding of UT prisoners in the prisons, the matter is