Steps taken for Decongestion of Delhi's Prisons amid 2nd COVID wave: Temporary Jail, Emergency Parole, Bail, Remission & more

Considering the statistics, it is manifest that the situation of COVID–19 in Delhi NCR is not only alarming but threatening. On daily basis, in the last month, continuously, not only the positivity rate, but also the death rate in COVID-19 positive cases is spiking sharply.

Members of the Committee have been informed by D.G. (Prisons) that against the optimum holding capacity of Delhi Prisons which is 10,026, whereas as on date 19,679 inmates are lodged, which is much beyond the holding capacity.

Furthermore, vide notification dated 08.04.2021 and 19.04.2021 the functioning of the High Court of Delhi, as well as Courts subordinate to it, has been restricted only to very urgent matters that too virtually.

The Members of the Committee discussed and deliberated upon the proposed category of prisoners, who may be considered for grant of interim bail for 90 days, preferably on ‘Personal Bond’:

1. 1. Inmates undergoing Civil Imprisonment;
   2. Under trial prisoners (UTPs) who are facing trial in a case which prescribes a maximum sentence of 7 years or less wherein he/she is in custody for a period of 15 days or more;
   3. Under trial prisoners (UTPs)/Remand Prisoners (with respect to whom, Charge sheets are yet to be filed), who are in custody for 15 days or more, facing trial in a case which prescribes a maximum sentence of 7 years or less ;
   4. Under trial prisoners (UTPs), who are senior citizens more than 60 years of age and are in custody for three months or more, facing trial in a case which prescribes a maximum sentence of 10 years or less;
   5. Under trial prisoners (UTPs), who are less than 60 years of age and are in custody for six months or more, facing trial in a case which prescribes a maximum sentence of 10 years or less; subject to the condition that he should not be involved in any other case which prescribes punishment of more than 7 years;
   6. Under trial prisoners (UTPs), who are suffering from HIV, Cancer, Chronic Kidney Dysfunction (UTPs requiring Dialysis), Hepatitis B or C, Asthma, and TB and are in custody, facing trial in a case which prescribes a maximum sentence of 10 years or less and are not involved in multiple cases;
2. 7. Under trial prisoners (UTPs) who are suffering from HIV, Cancer, Chronic Kidney Dysfunction (UTPs requiring Dialysis), Hepatitis B or C, Asthma, and TB and are in custody for a period of three months or more and facing trial in a case which prescribes punishment of 10 years up to life imprisonment and are not involved in multiple cases.
3. 8. Under trial prisoners (UTPs) facing trial for offence under Section 304 IPC and are in jail for more than six months with no involvement in any other case;
   9. Under trial prisoners (UTPs) facing trial in a case under Section 307 IPC and are in jail for more than six months; subject to the condition that he should not be involved in any other case which prescribes punishment of more than 7 years;
   10. Under trial prisoners (UTPs) (who are related as spouse of the deceased) facing trial for a case under 304B IPC and are in jail for more than one year with no involvement in any other case;
   11. Under trial prisoners (UTPs) (who are related as father-in-law, mother-in-law, brothers-in-law, sisters-in-law of the deceased) facing trial for offence under Section 304B IPC and are in jail for more than six years with no involvement in any other case;

It has further been resolved that following category of UTPs, even if falling in the above criterion should not be considered:

1. Those inmates who are undergoing trial for intermediary/ large quantity recovery under NDPS Act;
2. Those under trial prisoners who are facing trial under Section 4 & 6 of POCSO Act;
3. Those under trial prisoners who are facing trial for offences under section 376, 376A, 376AB, 376B, 376C, 376D, 376DA, 376DB, and 376E and Acid Attack;
4. Those UTPs who are foreign nationals;
5. Those under trial prisoners who are facing trial under Prevention of Corruption Act (PC Act) / PMLA, MCOCA; and
6. Cases investigated by CBI/ED/NIA/Special Cell of Delhi Police, Crime Branch, SFIO, Terror related Cases, Riot cases, cases under Anti-National Activities and Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act etc.
7. Those Under Trial Prisoners who are now in custody for an offence committed by him during the period of interim bail granted to him on the basis of criteria adopted by High Powered Committee in its earlier meetings;
8. Those Under Trial Prisoners who were granted interim bail on the basis of criteria adopted by High Powered Committee in its earlier meetings but failed to surrender in terms of the surrender order and are now in custody, only on execution of non-bailable warrant against him/them.

Mr. Sandeep Goel, DG (Prisons) has informed that on the basis of these criteria approximately 4000 UTPs would be benefited and their release would ease out the Jail Population.

The UTPs falling in above criteria may move their application for interim bail either through their Private Counsels or through Panel Lawyers of DSLSA, annexing the copy of custody warrants with the applications.

It was clarified that the Committee’s decision for release of prisoners on “interim bail” by the above criterion, shall in no way affect the rights of other UTPs, who do not stand covered. The concerned courts on filing of applications by such UTPs may consider the same on merits, in accordance with law.

FEEDBACK REGARDING GRANT OF "EMERGENCY PAROLE" TO THE CONVICTS BY GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI FOR A PERIOD OF 8 WEEKS

Kanwal Jeet Arora, Member Secretary, DSLSA informed Justice Vipin Sanghi that Delhi Govt. vide Notification dated 23.03.2020 had incorporated the provision of “Emergency Parole”.

Those convicts who were earlier granted "Emergency Parole" and who surrendered after expiry of the period of "Emergency Parole" in terms of directions of this Committee may be considered for grant of fresh "Emergency Parole" for a period of 8 weeks in view of second wave of COVID-19.

REMISSION OF SENTENCE

The members of the Committee resolved that in the case of:

1. Convicts who are sentenced for 10 years and have already completed 9 ½ years of custody including regular remission, may be considered for 6 months special remission of sentence by Home Department, Govt. of NCT of Delhi;
2. Convicts who are sentenced for 7 years or more but less than 10 years, and are left with only 5 months to complete the sentence, may be considered for 5 months special remission of sentence;
3. Convicts who are sentenced for 5 years or more but less than 7 years, and left with only 4 months to complete the sentence, may be considered for 4 months special remission of sentence ;
4. Convicts who are sentenced for 3 years or more but less than 5 years, and left with only 3 months to complete the sentence, may be considered for 3 months special remission of sentence ;
5. Convicts who are sentenced for 1 year or more but less than 3 years, and left with only 2 months to complete the sentence, may be considered for 2 months special remission of sentence;

ADDITIONAL POINTS:

Mr. Kanwal Jeet Arora, Member Secretary, DSLSA, flagged an issue that the Police Authorities, at the time of arrest of an individual, are not complying with the directions and guidelines laid down by the Supreme Court in the case of Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar. The individuals are arrested in Mechanical manner, without recording due reasons for arrest in cases wherein prescribed punishment is less than 7 years, particularly in cases under section 379 and 411 IPC.

The Committee recommended issuance of direction to Police Commissioner to issue necessary guidelines to all DCPs to ensure compliance of Arnesh Kumar’s Judgment. It was decided that DSLSA shall be directed   to   conduct   sensitization programs of senior police officers online. Further, directions on administrative side shall be issued by Principal District and Sessions Judges to Magistrates to scrupulously ensure compliance of directions passed by Hon’ble Supreme Court).

This Committee recommends that all Courts dealing with Bail Applications shall ensure that the copy of the Bail order is positively sent to Jail Superintendent concerned, as well as to the concerned District Legal Services Authority for record and information.

Picture Source :