The central legal point established is the need to uphold prisoners' rights to prompt consideration of release applications, availability of judgments, provision of guardians for elderly prisoners, and improvement of the legal aid system.

Amar Saran & Vijay Lakshmi, JJ.: -

We have heard Sri Sudhir Mehrotra, learned special counsel for the High Court, learned Government Advocate Sri Akhilesh Singh, Sri Vimlendu Tripathi, learned A.G.A and Sri Patanjali Mishra, learned Amicus Curiae appointed by this Court.

2. Learned A.G.A. has filed affidavits on behalf of (a) Home Department, (b) I.G. (Prison), Principal Secretary Medical and Health and (c) ADG/IG (Prisons). He has also filed 5 charts mentioning tabular details as sought for by this Court. Reports by the District Judges, forwarded by the registry and UP SLSA (U.P. State Legal Services Authority, Lucknow) have also been filed.

3. Directions for convicts in jail for more than 14 years whose cases were to be considered for premature release.

In our order dated 27.11.2013 we have found the figure of 1223 such convicts to be unacceptably high and had directed that there should be a significant reduction in the number of such convicts by the next listing. Regretfully, the chart No. 1 relating to such convicts prisoners, who have undergone 14 years and more actual sentence without remission shows that the figure is still 1157. There seems to be no significant reduction from the earlier figure. The number of convicts who have been actually freed after the previous orders is not clear from the said chart. It is also not clear from the chart as to whether the nominal roles or the Form A disposals are being held up at the D.M.'s, or at the Jail, or at headquarters or at the Government (Advisory Board's) levels, but the major hurdle appears to be at the District Magistrates level. We would like better information on the next listing about the level at which delays are taking place and issuance of directions to the District Magistrates or other functionaries, where the disposals may have got struck for expediting the process. Explanations should also be sought from these authorities for the reasons for the delays, and why the G.O. dated 6.9.04 fixing the time schedule for consideration of the matters at different stages is not being strictly followed.

4. We are shocked to note that in some cases, even though the prisoners have been in jail for periods of 14 years and much more mentioned at serial Nos. 2, 18, 19, 23, 92, 93, 96, 97, 100, 110, 152, 156, 167, 270, 276, 277, 288, 297, 302, 304, 307, 310, 314, 316, 319, 320, 321, 323, 326, 330, 331, 342, 345, 396, 666, 674, 676, 677, 681, 695, 696, 697, 706, 929, 986, 1006, 1007, 1008, 1009, 1019, 1020, 1022, 1057, 1149, 1150 of Chart I, where the considerations of Forms A or nominal roles have been held up at the Court level, because the judgments are not available. One of the glaring example is at S.N. 396 relating to Pappu @ Chandrapal, who is detained in Central Jail Agra since last 29 years and his case has not even been considered at the jail level because of non availability of copy of judgment. We would like an explanation why even the judgments in the aforesaid serial numbers and other similar cases are not available, stalling consideration of applications in Forms A or nominal roles, even though the prisoners have been in jail for 14 or more years. We direct that immediate steps must be taken for making the judgments available at the jail level.

5. Likewise, another disturbing reason for non-consideration of applications in Form A for release on Probation appears that guardian is not available. A prisoner who has crossed 75 or more years of age may have lost his wife or most of other relatives who are accepted as guardians. Probation officers often refuse to be guardians. The result is that the applications in Form A of such prisoners are not considered beyond the jail level. Immediate directions must be issued that absence of private guardians will be no reason for non-consideration of Form A, and that probation officers or other suitable functionary shall be given the charge of his guardian on the release of the convict on probation or license.

6. A cursory perusal