WPPIL/136/2020
2023 Latest Caselaw 2414 UK

    IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
               AT NAINITAL

          HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI VIPIN SANGHI
                             AND
            HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE RAKESH THAPLIYAL


                        23RD AUGUST, 2023

         WRIT PETITION (PIL) No. 136 OF 2020

Santosh Upadhyay and another.
                                                               ...Petitioners

and

State of Uttarakhand and another.
                                                            ...Respondents

And

WRIT PETITION (PIL) No. 91 OF 2019

Ramchandra Alias Raju Verma.

...Petitioner

and

State of Uttarakhand and another.

...Respondents

Counsel for the petitioners in : Mr. D.S. Mehta, learned counsel. WPPIL No. 136/2020.

Counsel for the petitioner in WPPIL : Mr. Jagjit Singh Virk, learned Amicus No. 91/2019. Curiae.

Counsel for the State of : Mr. Sunil Khera, learned Deputy Uttarakhand. Advocate General for the State of Uttarakhand.

COMMON ORDER : (per Sri Vipin Sanghi, C.J.)

In compliance of our order dated 27.07.2023,

the State has filed two compliance affidavits. One

affidavit has been filed by the Inspector General of Prisons, Uttarakhand, District Jail Campus, Suddhowala,

Dehradun, and the other has been filed by the Additional

Secretary, Department of Home, Government of

Uttarakhand. Ms. Radha Raturi, Secretary (Home),

Government of Uttarakhand has also joined the

proceedings virtually, along with the Inspector General

of Prisons.

2. We have heard the learned counsels, as well

as Mr. Vijay Raghavan and Mr. Murali Karnam, the

Members of the Committee, who have submitted their

report.

3. The affidavit filed by the IG, Prisons discloses

that, currently, there are 740 incarcerated individuals

within the jails of Uttarakhand, who are under trial for

offences, where maximum sentence is seven years. The

complete list of all such under-trials has been provided

as Annexure No. 1 to the affidavit. The jail-wise

summary of the under-trials has also been tabulated in

the affidavit. It is also stated that there are 23 inmates,

out of the said 740 under-trials, who have either not

furnished their sureties, or are not in a position to

submit their sureties, despite grant of bail to them. All

such cases have been enlisted in Annexure 2 to the

affidavit.

4. In respect of the 740 under-trials, who are

enlisted in Annexure No. 1 to the affidavit of the IG,

Prisons, we direct that the bail applications of the said

under-trials, if pending, should be decided without any

delay, and strictly in compliance of the judgment of the

Supreme Court in Satender Kumar Antil v. Central

Bureau of Investigation and another, (2022) 10

SCC 51, and, in particular paragraph no. 100.11

thereof, which directs that bail applications ought to be

disposed of within two weeks, except if the provisions

mandate otherwise, with the exception being an

intervening application. The State should bring to notice

of the concerned Courts our order, as well as the

particulars of the Bail Applications of the under-trials

enlisted in Annexure No. 1, which are pending in the

said Courts. This order shall also be communicated/

circulated to all the District and Sessions Judges for

onward communication to all the concerned Courts

dealing with Bail Applications of the under-trials, who

are facing trials in cases, where the maximum sentence

is seven years. The under-trials, enlisted in Annexure

No. 1, should also be communicated our order through

the concerned Jail Superintendents, so that they may be

able to seek disposal of their pending bail applications, if

filed, or as and when filed.

5. In relation to the under-trials, who, despite

grant of bail, have not been released, we find that some

of them have recently been granted bail, but they have

not furnished their sureties, as directed by the Court,

possibly on account of their involvement in few other

cases. The particulars of such under-trials are

mentioned in Annexure No. 2. Leaving apart such of the

under-trials, who are involved in several cases, and who

do not appear to have furnished sureties for the reason

that they may not have obtained bail in other cases in

which they are involved, insofar as other under-trial

prisoners are concerned, such of them, who have

remained incarcerated for more than six months, and

have not been able to furnish sureties for a month, after

passing of the orders granting bail in their favour, should

be released upon their furnishing their own personal

bonds. This is a continuing direction, and the concerned

Courts and other authorities shall continue to implement

this direction, as and when a case is found to fall in this

category.

6. The affidavit of Shri Atar Singh, the Additional

Secretary, Department of Home discloses that the Prison

Development Board has been constituted in pursuance

of Section 59 of the Prison Act, 1894. The learned

counsel for the State has tendered in Court a notification

issued in this regard on 10.08.2023. The constitution of

the Board is as follows :-

              1.   जेल मंत्री / मु�मंत्री                    -     अ��
              2.   मु� सिचव, उ�राख� शासन                     -     उपा��
              3.   प्रमुख सिचव / सिचव, गृह (कारागार) िवभाग   -     सद�
              4.   प्रमुख सिचव / सिचव, िव� िवभाग             -     सद�
              5.   महािनरी�क, कारागार                        -     प्रबंध िनदेशक

7. The Board is required to meet at least once

every six months. The mandate of the Board has also

been stated in the order. A sum of Rupees One Crore

has also been provided to the Board to carry out its

activities. We have suggested to Ms. Raturi that she

should suggest names of other public spirited persons

and volunteers, who may be interested in the subject of

Jail Reforms, and in the subject - for fulfilment of which

the said Board has been constituted, and who may offer

valuable inputs for the functioning of the Board

effectively. Ms. Raturi has stated that she shall provide

a panel of such persons, some of whom may also be

included in the Board. Let the panel of such persons be

produced before us on the next date. A brief

background of the persons, whose names are suggested,

should also be disclosed.

8. The recruitment process in respect of several

posts, which are lying vacant, is underway. The affidavit

has disclosed that, in respect of Jail Warders, the main

examination is scheduled for 15.10.2023, and the final

results would be declared for the same in December,

2023. So far as the posts of Deputy Jailors are

concerned, the selection process has been stayed by this

Court in Writ Petition (S/S) No. 942/2023 on

27.06.2023. We have called for the record of the said

file, and we have examined the orders passed therein.

The said order dated 27.06.2023 has also been affirmed

by us in the Special Appeal.

9. Ms. Raturi states that she shall examine the

grievance raised by the writ petitioner in the aforesaid

Writ Petition, and, if possible, the same shall be

remedied so that the recruitment process, which stands

stayed, can be resumed.

10. It is also disclosed in the affidavit that for the

post of Jail Superintendent, the evaluation of answer-

sheets of the main examination is ongoing, and the

results would be declared in the last week of December,

2023, and the final results would be declared in the last

week of March, 2024. For the post of Personal

Assistant, requisition of 10 posts has been received by

the Uttarakhand Public Service Commission. The said

Commission has also reported that requisition for the

remaining 20 posts, which has been received by it from

the State is not complete, and complete information is

awaited. The State should expedite the providing of

information in respect of the said 20 posts, so that the

process of recruitment may be proceeded with. The

status report to be filed before the next date should

report further progress made in respect of the aforesaid

recruitments.

11. Mr. Vijay Raghavan has suggested that the

State should consider premature release of convicts,

who are 60 years, or older, and who have completed at

least 07 years of incarceration. Ms. Raturi submits that

the State has a policy in this regard, which is being

adhered to, and it has been offered by the Secretary

(Law), who is also present virtually, that in the next

affidavit, the details of all persons who have been

released prematurely, would be provided to the Court.

Let the same be done.

12. Mr. Raghavan has also raised the issue with

regard to payment of wages to the prisoners. He

submits that they should be paid as per the minimum

wages fixed by the State. The Board, which has been

constituted, should examine this issue in its first meeting

itself, and take an appropriate decision. The same be

also brought on record before the next date.

13. Mr. Raghavan has also suggested that e-

Kiosks should be set up in all the prisons by the District

Legal Services Authority, so that information could be

provided to the prisoners with regard to their cases.

We find this suggestion to be useful and positive. We,

therefore, direct the State to take steps in this regard.

The concerned DLSAs should also be involved in the

process. Progress be reported before the next date.

14. Another important aspect pointed out by Mr.

Raghavan, is with regard to the minor children of the

women prisoners. He submits that the interaction of the

Committee with the prisoners shows that women

prisoners are very concerned about the wellbeing of

their children. He has suggested that in each district,

the State should identify at least one NGO, which should

keep an oversight on the children whose mothers are

incarcerated, and wherever required, the matter should

be reported to the Child Welfare Committee for taking

remedial steps. Let the Department of Women and Child

Development of the State undertake the exercise of

identifying the NGOs in each District, who could be

entrusted with the task of keeping an oversight over

minor children of women prisoners. The protocol that

should be followed to deal with such children, in case of

need, should be worked out, and implemented by the

State. The next status report should disclose the steps

taken to implement this direction.

15. Mr. Murali Karnam has highlighted the issue

with regard to the serious scarcity of space in the

prisons. He submits that no expansion has been made

since the year 2000 in the prisons, and it is the

obligation of the State to provide sufficient space for

setting-up of prisons. He has suggested that, in each

district, one Open Prison should be setup to decongest

the existing prisons. The State is directed to address

this concern. In the affidavit to be filed before the next

date, the State should disclose what steps have been

taken in this regard.

16. List on 01.11.2023.

________________ VIPIN SANGHI, C.J.

___________________ RAKESH THAPLIYAL, J.

Dt: 23rd AUGUST, 2023 Rahul