The Kerala High Court while observing that enough sufficient space should be provided in jails so that counsels can speak with their clients privately.
The court further issued directions to the concerned authorities to consider the possibility of granting space or considering other options like a rough sketch submitted by the District Legal Services Authority.
Brief Facts:
The present Writ Petition is filed by the Petitioner because of the non-availability of privacy for advocate-client interviews. The case of the Petitioner is that he is an advocate representing one accused who was remanded to Judicial Custody. In accordance with Section 40 of the Prison Act, 1894 and Section 47 of the Kerala Prisons and Correctional Services (Management) Act, 2010, the learned counsel and his client must be given privacy. However, there is no privacy as the office of the jail warden is right next to the meeting place and the warden listens to every conversation happening between the Petitioner and his client.
Despite directions to Respondent No. 2, there has been nothing done so far to ensure privacy and hence, the present petition.
Observations of the Court:
It was observed that there should be enough space available for the counsels and clients to interact privately.
The decision of the Court:
The High Court directed the Respondents to consider the possibility of granting space and adopt a rough sketch submitted by the District Legal Services Authority to always ensure that privacy is maintained between the advocate and his client.
Accordingly, the Writ Petition was disposed of.
Case Title: Prasoon Sunny v. State of Kerala & Ors.
Coram: Hon’ble Chief Justice Mr. S. Manikumar, Hon’ble Mr. Justice Shaji P. Chaly
Case No.: WP(C) No. 30827 of 2022
Advocate for Petitioner: Adv. Prasoon Sunny
Advocates for Respondents: Sri. Tek Chand V., Senior Government Pleader
Read Judgment @LatestLaws.com:
Picture Source :
