Madras High Court
V.Krishnan vs State Rep By on 4 July, 2019
Author: A.D.Jagadish Chandira
Bench: A.D.Jagadish Chandira
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Dated 04.07.2019
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA
Crl.OP.No.16070 of 2019
V.Krishnan .. Petitioner
Vs
1.State rep by
The Inspector of Police,
CBI/ACB, Chennai.
2.The Superintendent, (Convict)
Central Prison Puzhal, Chennai. .. Respondents
Prayer:- Petition filed under section 482 Cr.P.C., to direct the second
respondent to accommodate the petitioner in “A” class facilities as per
recommended by the learned IX additional Special Judge for CBI, Chennai, in
C.C.No.3 of 1999, dated 30.05.2019.
For Petitioner : Mr.M.Shankar
For R-1 : Mr.K.Srinivasan, SPP (CBI)
For R-2 : Mr.K.Prabaharan, APP
ORDER
The above petition has been filed seeking to direct the 2nd respondent to accommodate the petitioner in “A” class facilities as per recommendation made by the learned IX Additional Special Judge for CBI Cases, Chennai, in C.C.No.3 of 1999, dated 30.05.2019. http://www.judis.nic.in 2 2 The case of the petitioner is that he was convicted by the Trial Court for the offence under Sections 120(b), 409, 420, 477(a) of the Indian Penal Code and Section 13(2) r/w 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act and he was sentenced to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for two years. The petitioner filed Crl.A.No.206 of 2006, which was dismissed by this Court and subsequently, the Special Leave Petition was also dismissed by the Hon'ble Apex Court. Thereafter, the petitioner was secured by the 1st respondent and he was committed to the Central Prison, Puzhal to undergo the sentence awarded by the Trial Court. At the time of committal to prison the petitioner had filed a petition under Rule 225 of the Tamil Nadu Prisoners Manual 1983, seeking to make an initial recommendation to the 2nd respondent to accommodate the petitioner in “A” class facility in the prison. The Trial Court by letter dated 30.05.2019, had forwarded the recommendation along with the medical records for further necessary action. Since, no orders have been passed by the 2nd respondent regarding “A” class facility the petitioner had approached this Court seeking for direction.
3 The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is not a habitual offender and that in view of his Social Status, education and having been accustomed to superior mode of life, the petitioner is entitled to be classified as “A” class prisoner as per Rule 225 of http://www.judis.nic.in 3 the Tamil Nadu Prisoners Manual 1983. He would submit that the petitioner is a Post Graduate in Business Administration and he is an income Tax Payer for a long period. Apart from that, he is also suffering from various illness. Further, he would submit that despite the recommendation having been made by the learned Trial Judge on 30.05.2019, the 2nd respondent has not taken any steps, thereby, necessitating the petitioner to approach this Court seeking for a direction to accommodate the petitioner in “A” class facilities.
4 Mr.K.Srinivasan, learned Special Public Prosecutor (CBI) appearing for the 1st respondent, would submit that the case of the petitioner has to be considered only by the prison authority or the Government and the 1st respondent has no role in this case. Further, he would submit that the petitioner is an Income Tax Assesse and thereby, he may be considered as per Rule 217 of the Tamil Nadu Prison Manual as he was accustomed to superior mode of life.
5 Mr.K.Prabakaran, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the 2nd respondent would submit that after the receipt of the initial recommendation, as per Rule 226 and 227 of the Tamil Nadu Prisoners Manual 1983, the 2nd respondent has got powers only to forward such petition requesting “A” class to the Government through proper channel viz., the http://www.judis.nic.in 4 DGP/Inspector General of Prisons for suitable consideration. Further, he would submit that the recommendation has to be sent along with the report from the District Collector, Chennai and further the 2nd respondent vide office letter No.7566/R1/2019, dated 19.06.2019, had called for a report from the District Collector, Chennai and he is awaiting for the report. He would further submit that only after receiving the report from the District Collector, Chennai, the proposal can be forwarded to the Government through proper channel for consideration. Further, he would reiterate that the Trial Court has not made any recommendation but it has only forwarded the application.
6 I have perused the letters sent by the learned IX Additional Special Judge for CBI Cases, Chennai, dated 30.05.2019, pertaining to the petitioner.
7 The learned Judge had forwarded the petition along with medical records for necessary action. This Court is of the opinion that forwarding the petition for necessary action implies the recommendation by the Trial Judge. In this case, the Trial Court had forwarded the recommendation as per Rule 227 of the Tamil Nadu Prisoners Manual 1983, and the Superintendent of Prison has to forward the petition to the Government through the Inspector General of Police. As per Rule 226(1) of the Tamil Nadu Prisoners Manual 1983, pending orders of the Government, the prisoners recommended by the Court, for classification in class “A” shall be tentatively treated as belonging http://www.judis.nic.in 5 to the class recommended until the orders of Government confirming or reviewing the recommendations are received.
8 Now, since, the application is forwarded to the Government, in view of Rule 226(1) of the Tamil Nadu Prisoners Manual 1983, a direction is issued to the 2nd respondent tentatively treat the petitioner as belonging to class recommended viz., class “A” until the orders of Government confirming or reviewing the recommendations are received.
9 With this direction, the above petition is closed.
04.07.2019 Internet : Yes/No Index : Yes/No Speaking/Non-Speaking ssi Note: Issue order copy on 15.07.2019 To
1.The Inspector of Police, CBI/ACB, Chennai.
2. The Superintendent, (Convict) Central Prison Puzhal, Chennai.
3. The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Chennai.
http://www.judis.nic.in 6 A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA,J.
ssi Crl.OP.No.16070 of 2019 04.07.2019 http://www.judis.nic.in