The main legal principle established is that the right to expeditious trial is inherent in the right to life and personal liberty under Article 21, and the State has a duty to ensure compliance with constitutional and statutory obligations to protect the rights of detenus and under-trial prisoners.

1. A humane cause of those human beings who are segregated from the society in the interest of society and State, and are kept within protective walls in legal phraseology called "Jail(s)" is projected on the grounds traceable to Article 21 of the Constitution of India. It is projected that this section of society which is entitled to certain rights recognized in law and guaranteed by Article 21 of the Constitution, is allegedly deprived of these rights by action of the State and its authorities. The citizens of the State who are removed from the civil society either under the provisions of J&K Public Safety Act of 1978, (for short Act of 1978), and/or on charges of having committed penal offences, and are facing trial in the courts of law are lodged in the jails under orders of appropriate authority. It is alleged that instead of dealing with them in accordance with the mandate as contained in Article 21 of the Constitution of India, providing, that the trials pending against them must be concluded expeditiously, efforts are made to delay such trials by not producing these under-trial prisoners before the Court of competent jurisdiction for months together. The central theme of the writ petition is based on the deprivation of right to have expeditious trial which is implicit in life and personal liberty as guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. It is also projected that appropriate medical treatment is not being provided to the detenus and under-trial prisoners. The cause thus projected and the grounds summarized in the writ petition having been found to be of significant importance resulted in treating of lis as in "Public Interest" vide order dated 19th Oct. 2006 and that is how the matter has proceeded. Number of directions have been issued and compliance thereof sought from the respondents.

2. Committees constituted at district levels headed by Pr. District and Sessions Judges have also submitted reports about the jail conditions, as also, how many under-trials have not been produced before the Court(s) for months together. The petitioner-association also filed series of reports prepared by them while visiting various jails to indicate that in some cases under-trials have not been produced before the Courts even for months together.

3. We have heard learned counsel for parties. Considered the matter and the record available with the writ petition(s).

4. Mr. M.A. Qayoom, ld. counsel for petitioner, while referring to reports of the petitioner-association indicated that while interacting with the under-trials during visits to the Jails, it was noticed that some of the under-trials have not been produced before the courts on many dates of hearing, and some under-trials are allegedly subjected to in-human treatment. Ld. counsel further submitted, that some detenus/under-trial prisoners are not being provided even minimum medical facilities. The learned counsel also submitted, that in order to facilitate production of the under-trials before the Courts where their cases are pending, the under-trial prisoners shall be lodged in the prisons nearer to such Courts. The ld counsel also submitted that the State-authority shall be directed to constitute a special force which shall be exclusively charged with the duty of escorting/transporting the under-trial prisoners from prisons to the Courts where their cases are pending. The ld counsel further submitted that respondents shall be directed to take all steps to provide the proper medical facilities to detenus/under-trials.

5. Learned counsel in view of the order dated 19th Oct. 2009 also filed report to substantiate his contention that citizens of the State who are within the confines of jails either as detenu and/or under-trials are allegedly denied the constitutional guarantees available to them under Article 21 of the Constitution.

6. Ld counsel Mr. M.A. Qayoom, also referred to Section 41 of the Prisoners Act of 1977 (for short Act of 1977), and clauses 18.1, 18.32

Click Here to Read the rest of this document