SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
V.R. KRISHNA IYER, R.S. PATHAK AND O. CHINNAPPA REDDY, JJ.
Sunil Batra, Petitioner
Versus
Delhi Administration, Respondent.
Writ Petn. No. 1009 of 1979
Decided on 20-12-1979.
Advocates appeared
Dr. Y. S. Chitale, Sr. Advocate, (Mr, Mukul Mudgal with him), for Petitioner; Mr. Soli J. Sorabjee, Sol. Genl. (Mr. R. N. Sachthey Advocate with him), for Respondent.
-held, fundamental rights do not flee the person for entering prison. International Covenant On Prisoner’s Right, assented to by India. Prison justice and judicial jurisdiction now recognised in India, the Court will come to rescue if right of prisoner under Constitution or other law is violated.
JUDGMENT
KRISHNA IYER, J. :— This writ petition originated, epistolery fashion, in a letter by a prisoner, Batra, to a judge of this Court (one of us), complaining of a brutal assault by a Head Warder on another prisoner, Prem Chand. Forms were forsaken since freedom was at stake and the letter was posted on the Bench to be metamorphosed into a habeas proceeding and was judicially navigated with eclectic creativity thanks to the humanist scholarship of Dr. Y. S. Chitale as amicus curiae, and the erudite passion for affirmative court action of Shri Soli Sorabjee, the learned Solicitor General. Where the prison process is de-humanised, forensic help, undeflected by the negative crudities of the adversary system, makes us dare where we might have daunted. The finest hour of justice comes when court and counsel constructively collaborate to fashion a relief in the individual case and fathom deeper to cure the institutional pathology which breeds wrongs and defies rights. Here, the individual is a prisoner whose anus was allegedly pierced with a warders baton and the institution is the Tihar Prison, right in the capital of the country and under the nose of the Home Ministry.
The Perspective.
2. This case is revelatory of several sins in this central penitentiary. Some thing is rotting the State of Denmark! The constitutional imperative which informs our perspective in this habeas corpus proceedings must first be set out. The rule of law meets with its Waterloo when the States minions become lawbreakers and so the court, as the sentinel of the nation and the voice of the Constitution, runs down the violators with its writ and secures compliance with human rights even behind iron bars and by prison warders. This case is at once a symptom, a symbol and a signpost vis-a-vis human right in prison situations. When prison trauma prevails, prison justice must invigilate and hence we broaden our habeas jurisdiction. Jurisprudence cannot slumber when the very campuses of punitive justice witness torture.
3. The petitioner does not seek the release of the prisoner because a life sentence keeps him in confinement. But the dynamic role of judicial remedies, after Batras case (1979) 1 SCR 392 imparts to the habeas corpus writ a versatile vitality and operational utility that makes the healing presence of the law live up to its reputation as bastion of liberty even within the secrecy of the hidden cell. Blackstone called it the great and efficacious writ in all manner of illegal confinement and Lord Denman proclaimed in 1839 that it had been for ages effectual to an extent never known in any other country. So long as Batra remains good law, judicial policing of Bastille practices will broaden to embrace the wider range of prison vices. Dr. Chitale drew our attention to American legal literature disclosing the trend while Shri Soli Sorabjee for the Union of India, cited Corwin. Corwins remarks (Supplement to Edward S. Corwins. The Constitution p. 245 quoted in 1 supra at p. 410) on American constitutional law, referred to with approval in Batra, has our assent:
"Federal courts have intensified their oversight of State penal facilities, reflecting a heightened concern with the extent to which the ills that plague so-called correctional institution-overcrowding, understaffing, unsanitary facilities, brutality, constant fear of violence, lack of adequate medial and mental health care, poor food service, intrusive correspondence restrictions, inhumane isolation, segregation, inadequate or non-existent rehabilitative and/or educational programs, deficient recreational opportunities-violate the Eighth Amendment ban on cruel and unusual punishments."
4. The essence of the matter is that in our era of human rights consciousness the habeas writ has functional plurality and the constitutional regard for human decency and dignity is tested by this capability. We ideologically accept the words of Will Durant (Sunil Batra v. Delhi Admn. (supra) at . 422). "It is t
relied on : Kharak Sineh v. State of U P
D Bhawan Mohan Patnaik v. State of A P
followed : The guide lines in Sunil Batra v. Delhi Administration
relied on : Maneka Gandia v. Union of India
M H Hoskot v. State of Maharashtra
D. Bhuwan Mohan Patnaik v. State of A P
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.