9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
1. Illegal incarceration and violation of personal liberty in Bihar prisons. Analysis: The judgment by the Supreme Court of India, delivered by Justice V.R. Krishna Iyer, addresses the issue of illegal incarceration and violation of personal liberty in Bihar prisons. The case involved two petitioners who had been imprisoned since 1972, with their personal liberty subverted by the police, prison officials, and the magistracy. The court highlighted the gross indifference of the Bihar State towards citizens deprived of their liberty for indefinite and prolonged periods, emphasizing the unconscionable aspect of the state's unconcern for human rights. The court issued a directive to the jail authorities and District Magistrates to explain the nature of the charges against the petitioners, the stage of trial, and the reason for the delay in proceedings. Despite repeated adjournments and the State's failure to furnish basic information, the court took a strict stance, issuing notices to the defaulting authorities to show cause why action for violation of the court's direction should not be taken against them. The judgment emphasized the importance of fair procedure in justifying detention of individuals, citing previous cases where the court had stressed the need for monitoring by the law to prevent arbitrary deprivation of personal liberty. The court found that the petitioners had been enduring incarceration for over seven years without proper investigation or charge sheets being presented before the court, highlighting the failure of the magistracy to fulfill their primary obligation. The court invoked Article 21 of the Constitution and Section 167(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code, emphasizing that the provisions guaranteeing personal liberty were being disregarded in the case at hand. The court criticized the mechanical authorization of repeated detentions by the magistrates, highlighting the abdication of responsibilities by the police, prison staff, and judicial officers in ensuring compliance with legal mandates. Ultimately, the court directed the release of the petitioners on their own bond without sureties, emphasizing that bail does not necessarily require sureties. The judgment concluded with a call for the appointment of a special officer with judicial experience to conduct a comprehensive survey of all cases of prisoners in Bihar to address the issue of illegal custody and ensure the protection of personal freedoms.
|
