2022 Supreme(Online)(Kar) 56228
- 1 -
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF APRIL, 2022
PRESENT
THE HON’BLE MR. RITU RAJ AWASTHI, CHIEF JUSTICE
AND
THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR
WRIT PETITION NO.18741 OF 1996 (GM-RES) PIL
BETWEEN:
KARNATAKA STATE LEGAL
SERVICES AUTHORITY
PALACE ROAD
BANGALORE – 560 001
REPRESENTED BY ITS
SECRETARY
... PETITIONER
(SUO MOTU PETITION
AMENDED VIDE ORDER DATED 26.08.2002
BY SRI M.N.UMASHANKAR, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA
VIDHANA SOUDHA
BANGALORE – 560 001
REPRESENTED BY ITS
CHIEF SECRETARY
2. CITIZEN’S ACTION GROUP
JAWAN’S QUARTERS
BDA PARK, DOUBLE ROAD
- 2 -
INDIRANAGAR, I STAGE
BANGALORE
REPRESENTED BY ITS
SECRETARY
3. UNION OF INDIA
BY ITS SECRETARY
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH
AND FAMILY WELFARE
NIRMAN BHAVAN
NEW DELHI
... RESPONDENTS
(SRI DHYAN CHINNAPPA, ADDITIONAL ADVOCATE
GENERAL ALONG WITH
SMT.REVATHY ADINATH NARDE, SPECIAL COUNSEL
FOR RESPONDENT NO.1
SMT.LAILA OLLAPALLY, ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT
NO.2 – INTERVENER – VIDE COURT ORDER DATED
15.04.2002
SRI KUMAR M.N., CGC FOR RESPONDENT NO.3 –
VIDE COURT ORDER DATED 26.08.2002)
---
THIS SUO MOTU WRIT PETITION IS INITIATED
PURSUANT TO THE ORDER DATED 05.09.1995 PASSED
BY THE HON’BLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF
SHEELA BARSE VS. UNION BANK OF INDIA AND
OTHERS REPORTED IN (1995) 5 SCC 654 AND ETC.
THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCING THIS DAY,
CHIEF JUSTICE MADE THE FOLLOWING:
- 3 -
Mr.Naveen Raj Singh, Principal Secretary, Health
and Family Welfare (Medical Education), Government
of Karnataka, is present before the Court.
2.
This suo motu Public Interest Litigation has been
registered pursuant to the Hon’ble Supreme Court’s
direction
dated
05.09.1995.
The
order
dated
05.09.1995, on reproduction, reads as under:
“A letter from Ms. Sheela Barse addressed
to the Hon'ble Chief Justice of India with respect
to the deplorable conditions in which mentally ill
and insane women were locked up and kept in
Presidency jail, Calcutta, was registered as a
writ
petition
and
certain
orders
passed.
Subsequently, Ms.Sheela Barse withdrew from
the matter. In her place, the Supreme Court
Legal Aid Committee was substituted. Several
orders were passed by this Court from time to
time. Commissioners were also appointed to
investigate
and
report
on
the
conditions
obtaining in places where women and children
were being detained. Over the years, this Court
has also been monitoring the implementation of
its orders.
When this matter was placed before us on
August 21, 1995, it was suggested by Sri S.
Muralidhar, learned counsel for the petitioner
(Supreme Court Legal Aid Committee) and also
by some of the learned counsel appearing for
the respondents that it would be appropriate if
the function of monitoring the implementation of
the several orders passed by this Court is made
over to respective High Courts. It was suggested
- 4 -
that each High Court be requested to monitor
and ensure proper and full implementation of
the orders of this Court insofar as that particular
State is concerned. We found the suggestion
acceptable. Sri Muralidhar, learned counsel for
the petitioner and Sri Harish Salve, learned
counsel for the respondents have placed before
us their suggestions. The following orders are
made after hearing the learned counsel:
1. The office shall prepare requisite number of
sets of the record of this case. The record shall
be in two parts. Part-I shall contain the letter
written by Ms. Sheela Barse (along with the
enclosures thereto), the orders passed by this
Court from time to time arranged in proper
sequence and the reports of the Commissioners
appointed by this Court, again in their proper
sequence.
2. The office shall separate the affidavits,
counter
affidavits,
rejoinders
and
further
affidavits, if any, along with their annexures with
respect to each State separately. If there are
any affidavits, reports or other documents filed
by the Union of India, the same may be included
in each of such sets. This shall be treated as
Part-II of the record. Obviously, it will be
separate for each State concerned herein.
3. The cost of preparing both Parts-I and II shall
be borne by the Union of India. After the record
is prepared as directed above, the cost thereof
shall be intimated to the learned counsel for the
Union
of
India
in
this
case
who
shall
communicate
the
same
to
the
concerned
authority. The payment shall be made into the
office
of
this
Court
within
three
months
therefrom.
4. The office shall communicate a copy of Part-I
to each of the High Courts. Along with Part-I,
Part-II relating to that particular State shall also
be enclosed.
- 5 -
5. The High Courts are requested to register the
record so received by them as a Public Interest
Litigation. The Hon'ble Chief Justice of each of
the High Courts is requested to designate a
Judge of that Court to deal with the matter. The
High Court shall make all such necessary and
appropriate orders as may be warranted, from
time to time, for a proper implementation of the
orders of this Court. The High Court shall also be
free to pass such other and further orders as
may be found necessary or appropriate to
protect and improve the conditions obtaining in
places where women and children - not accused
or convicted of any crime - are detained.
6. The High Court Legal Aid Committee of each
of the High Courts shall be treated as the
petitioner in the matter in that High Court.
Copies
of
Pa