The jail authorities must strictly follow the procedural safeguards provided in the U. P. Jail Manual, including informing the court about the punishment, before awarding fetter punishment to undertrial prisoners.

S. K. PHAUJDAR, J.

The petitioner, Manjeet Singh, had been prose cuted under the provisions of the TADA and was under detention in Agra Central Jail, Agra, at the relevant time pending his trial for the offence. He sent an

application to the Honble Chief Justice, Allahabad High Court, alleging therein a irregularities in the prison so far under trials were con cerned. The application was treated as a habeas corpus writ petition and the District Judge, Agra, was asked to conduct an inquiry into the allegations made in the application. The report of the District Judge, Agra, indicated that the allegations of awarding punishment of fetters to the petitioner was true. It was stated that the petitioner was escorted from Agra Central Jail to the court and when he came back, he was found drunk. The petitioner was called to the court and his statement was recorded. He denied the allegations made against him and asserted that the punishment of fetters was imposed on him as he had dared to raise a voice of protest against the misdeed of Jail Authorities. The then Jailor and Jail Superin tendent of Agra Central Jail were asked to appear and they had filed their counter-affidavits in the matter. They were also orally examined in court and their statements were recorded.

2. According to the Jailor and Jail Superintendent, Manjeet Singh was escorted to the court of C. J. M. , Agra from the Jail on 20-10-1992. When he came back he was found drunk. He was produced before the jail doctor who found that the petitioner had consumed alcohal before coming back to the jail. Accordingly, the Jail Superintendent awarded him a punishment of fetters for a month. Subsequently, on 13-11-1992, the peti tioner allegedly gave an undertaking that there would be no recurrence of such incident and fetters were withdrawn. The jail authorities also con tended that the petitioner had misbehaved with the jail officials. It was further asserted that consumption of alcohal was also a misconduct for which the petitioner was liable for punishment under the jail rules.

The rules of procedure of administration in Jails in U. P. ate contained in the U. P. Jail Manual (in short the Manual ). Chapter XVIII of this Manual speaks of the procedure for admission of prisoners into the jails for their detention and also of maintenance of discipline in the jail by an under trial prisoners. Clause 427 under this Chapter speaks of punish ments that could be awarded to under trial prisoners. Under this Clause 427, an under trial prisoner is liable to be punished for breach of prison discip line with punishments that varies from formal warning to link-fetters and bar-fetters. The rules provide that the use of handcuffs, link-fetters and bar-fetters, as far as possible, should be avoided and the same may be used only in very special circumstances with full reasons for awarding such punishment. This rule also requires that the court concerned (i. e. the court under whose jurisdiction a person is kept as an under trial prisoner) shall, invariably, be informed of the reasons for using handcuffs, link-fetters and bar- fetters, in each case by the Jail Authorities. This clause also requires that the punishment so awarded shall be subject to the conditions laid down in Clauses 814 and 815. Clause 429 of the Manual requires that no under-trial prisoner should be fettered as a matter of routine. Such fetter could be awarded only as a punishment and that too, under proper intimation to the court concerned. In case of great risk of violence, punishment of fetters may be imposed for safety under information to the court concerned.

4. Chapter XXX of the U. P. Jail Manual deals with the punish ments. Clause 814 therein states what are the minor punishments and Clause 815 enumerates the major punishments. Putting a prisoner under bar-fetter is a major punishment under Clause 815. Clause 27 requires that any punishment to an undo trial prisoner shall be subject to clauses 814 and 815, clause 815 aga

Click Here to Read the rest of this document