Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Siddharth Mridul, Anup Jairam Bhambhani, JJ.
Neeraj Sehrawat & Ors. - Appellants
Versus
Govt Of NCT Of Delhi - Respondent
W.P. (Crl) (Writ Petition (Criminal)) No. 280 of 2021
Decided On : 10-02-2021
Exemption - Writ Petition - The court disposed of the exemption application subject to all just exceptions.
Fact of the Case:
The writ petition sought to allow the petitioners to meet a specific individual in jail twice every week.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the Delhi Police were permitting physical and virtual meetings with advocates and relatives for the inmates, with the possibility of reverting to pre-pandemic visitation rules in the future. As a result, the petitioners did not press the petition further, and it was disposed of accordingly.
Issues: The issue was whether the petitioners should be granted the specific visitation rights they sought through the writ petition.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was influenced by the information provided by the government counsel regarding the current and potential visitation arrangements for inmates.
Final Decision: The petition was disposed of accordingly, as the petitioners did not press the matter further.
JUDGMENT
Siddharth Mridul, J. - CRL.M.A.2115/2021 (Exemption)
Exemption granted subject to all just exceptions.
The application is disposed of accordingly.
W.P. (CRL.) 280/2021
1. The present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India instituted on behalf of the petitioners prays as follows: -
"a) Issue a Writ of Habeas Corpus or any other appropriate writ, thereby allowing the Petitioner Nos.2 and 3 to meet Petitioner No.1 in jail twice every week, in accordance with the Rules governing the name;
b) pass any other order or direction as this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper in favour of the petitioner in the interest of justice."
2. Mr. Rahul Mehra, learned Standing Counsel (Criminal) appearing on behalf of Government of NCT of Delhi on advance notice, on instructions from Mr. Prashant Verma, Officer-in-Charge (Legal) Delhi Prisons, Tihar Headquarters states that w.e.f. 05.02.2021 and 08.02.202, the Delhi Police are permitting 01 physical legal interview with an Advocate and 01 physical mulaakaat with a relative, respectively, to all the inmates every week. In addition, it is stated that 01 virtual legal interview with an Advocate and 01 virtual mulaakaat with a relative is also being permitted to every inmate, subject to certain guidelines. Mr. Mehra lastly states that prison authorities are hopeful of reverting back to the position vis- -vis mulaakaats that existed prior to the onset of Covid-19 pandemic i.e. 02 physical mulaakaats and 02 physical interviews to all inmates every week from 01.04.2021, subject to the pandemic remaining under control.
3. In view of the foregoing, Mr. Rudro Chatterjee, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners does not press this petition any further.
4. The petition is disposed of accordingly.
The court's decision was based on the current and potential visitation arrangements for inmates, as presented by the government counsel.
The court emphasized the importance of restoring inmate visitation rights while accommodating public health guidelines due to the pandemic.
The central legal point established in the judgment is the court's authority to issue detailed directions to address the challenges faced by inmates during the COVID-19 pandemic, ensuring access to f....
Judicial review of policy decisions should not interfere unless the policy is grossly arbitrary or irrational.
The discretionary nature of granting ordinary leave to convict prisoners under the T.N. Suspension of Sentence Rules and the limitations of the court's jurisdiction in such matters.
The central legal point established in the judgment is the obligation of the authorities to provide necessary facilities for prisoners, including regular communication with their families, expedited ....
The court emphasized the necessity for adequate facilities for under-trial prisoners to ensure their right to family contact and access to justice, particularly during the pandemic.
Inmates' rights to health and communication during COVID-19 pandemic must be upheld, prioritizing access to tele-calling and vaccination per Article 21.
The Enforcement Directorate officers are not Police officers under CrPC, thus they cannot seek custody beyond the initial 24 hours of arrest unless substantively justified; however, compliance with P....
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
