29th Edition | Addressing Overcrowding in Indian Prisons: Supreme Court's Directive
Amarjeet Prakash
Future Legal Luminary | Senior Legal Intern at the Chamber of Adv. Pushkar Sharma (AoR) at Supreme Court of India | Criminal Law, Cybersecurity & ADR Enthusiast
Case Title: Re-Inhuman Conditions In 1382 Prisons v. Director General of Prisons and Correctional Services and Ors., W.P.(C) No. 406/2013
On July 11, the Supreme Court of India issued a comprehensive order addressing the longstanding issue of overcrowding in Indian prisons. This directive came in response to a public interest litigation (PIL) aimed at alleviating the severe overcrowding in jails across various states.
Key Directions and Observations:
Affidavit Submission by States: The Supreme Court has mandated the states of Uttar Pradesh, Gujarat, Telangana, Tamil Nadu, and West Bengal to submit fresh affidavits. These affidavits are to consider the suggestions made by Amicus Curiae, Senior Advocate Gaurav Aggarwal. The court emphasized the need for states to implement effective and timely measures to address the overcrowding crisis.
District-level Committees: Previously, the Court had instructed states and union territories to form District-level Committees to evaluate and report on jail infrastructure, as per the Model Prison Manual, 2016. However, during the recent proceedings, it was noted that several states had failed to submit the required affidavits detailing jail infrastructure and implementation plans.
Delhi: For Delhi, a different committee structure is required, as suggested by Additional Solicitor General (ASG) Aishwarya Bhati. This committee will include the Member Secretary of the Delhi State Legal Services Authority (DLSA), the Principal Secretary of Home, the Director General of Tihar Jail, and a senior judicial officer. The court directed this committee to convene within four weeks and submit a report.
领英推荐
States of Haryana, Andhra Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh, and Maharashtra: While Haryana and Madhya Pradesh submitted their affidavits, Andhra Pradesh and Maharashtra did not. The Court questioned the delay and lack of compliance by these states.
Uttar Pradesh: The state of Uttar Pradesh is constructing eight new jails and additional barracks in existing jails. However, the court questioned the five-year timeline for these projects, urging the state to expedite the process. The Amicus highlighted urgent issues, such as the need for additional barracks and repairs to the drinking water pipeline. The court directed the state to prioritize these issues and file a fresh affidavit.
Gujarat: Gujarat is in the process of acquiring land for a new jail. The court instructed the state to examine the Amicus's recommendations and submit a fresh affidavit within four weeks.
Telangana: Despite minor overcrowding issues, Telangana's ten-year timeline for implementing recommendations was deemed unreasonable by the Court. The state was directed to prioritize and expedite its plans.
Tamil Nadu: Facing significant overcrowding in district jails and understaffing in sub-jails, Tamil Nadu proposed upgrading some sub-jails to district jails. The Court directed the state to make time-bound decisions regarding these upgrades and file a fresh affidavit.
West Bengal: The Court expressed dissatisfaction with West Bengal's response, urging the state to address all issues comprehensively in its next affidavit.
Karnataka: Though Karnataka submitted a compliance affidavit, the Amicus requested additional time for review. The Court granted this request, listing the matter for a subsequent hearing.
Conclusion: This directive underscores the Supreme Court's commitment to addressing the critical issue of overcrowding in Indian prisons. By mandating fresh affidavits and timely implementation of recommendations, the Court aims to ensure humane conditions for inmates and uphold their rights.
Assistant Vice President at ING Vysya Bank
3 个月Respected All, Pranams to your Lotus Feet, Justice is needed for all beings for peaceful living .For all beings, Justice is not costly and it is available instantly. In case of human beings , Justice is costly and it is never available instantly. The prayers of a poor man for Justice will never reach Chief Justice of India . I worked 33 years in Vysya Bank , ING Vysya Bank now Kotak Mahindra Bank for a period of 33 years and took VRS in the year 2007.,IBA signed a Joint Note dt.27.04.2010 to provide 2nd option for pension to all the employees that are on the roles of the bank as at 1995 and did not opt pension earlier . I opted for 2nd option for pension . Bank paid me all the benefits as per the said Joint Note but denied 2nd option for pension. I filed a suit in City Civil Court , Bangalore and the suit number is 6868/2013. It is adjourned more than 100 times . I submitted my issue to the kind notice of His Excellency Chief Justice of India more than 2000 times. I once again Pray His Excellency Chief Justice of India to provide me justice. *_I SINCIERLY REQUEST EVERY ONE TO CIRCULATE THIS TILL IT REACHES THE KIND ATTENTION OF CHIEF JUSTICE OF INDIA.*_ Mallikharjunarao SSK +91 9490762693,AP, INDIA
Assistant Vice President at ING Vysya Bank
3 个月Respected All, Pranams to your Lotus Feet, Justice is needed for all beings for peaceful living .For all beings, Justice is not costly and it is available instantly. In case of human beings , Justice is costly and it is never available instantly. The prayers of a poor man for Justice will never reach Chief Justice of India . I worked 33 years in Vysya Bank , ING Vysya Bank now Kotak Mahindra Bank for a period of 33 years and took VRS in the year 2007.,IBA signed a Joint Note dt.27.04.2010 to provide 2nd option for pension to all the employees that are on the roles of the bank as at 1995 and did not opt pension earlier . I opted for 2nd option for pension . Bank paid me all the benefits as per the said Joint Note but denied 2nd option for pension. I filed a suit in City Civil Court , Bangalore and the suit number is 6868/2013. It is adjourned more than 100 times . I submitted my issue to the kind notice of His Excellency Chief Justice of India more than 2000 times. I once again Pray His Excellency Chief Justice of India to provide me justice. *_I SINCIERLY REQUEST EVERY ONE TO CIRCULATE THIS TILL IT REACHES THE KIND ATTENTION OF CHIEF JUSTICE OF INDIA.*_ Mallikharjunarao SSK +91 9490762693,AP, INDIA.