Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 3, Cited by 0]

Madras High Court

Sekar vs The Director General Of Prison on 18 March, 2024

Author: G.Jayachandran

Bench: G.Jayachandran

                                                                             W.P.(MD).No.3814 of 2024

                             BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

                                                 DATED: 18.03.2024

                                                       CORAM

                                  THE HONOURABLE DR.JUSTICE G.JAYACHANDRAN
                                                    AND
                                   THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN

                                              W.P.(MD).No.3814 of 2024

                     Sekar                                                        .. Petitioner

                                                            Vs.
                     1.The Director General of Prison,
                       Directorate of the Central Prison,
                       Chennai.

                     2.The Deputy Director General of Prison,
                       Directorate of the Central Prison,
                       Chennai.

                     3.The Superintendent of Prison,
                       Trichy Central Prison,
                       Trichy.                                                .. Respondents

                     PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
                     to issue a writ of Mandamus, to direct the first respondent to forbear the
                     third respondent from removing entire clothes from the body in the name of
                     check-up while returning to the prison through escort and consequently
                     ensuring the prisoner's right to have access to basic amenities by following
                     the Tamil Nadu Prison Rules, 1983 scrupulously.


                     Page 1 of 7



https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
                                                                                    W.P.(MD).No.3814 of 2024

                                        For Petitioner     : Mr.R.Vignesh
                                                             for Mr.J.Vijayaraja

                                        For Respondents : Mr.S.Ravi
                                                          Additional Public Prosecutor

                                                             ORDER

DR.G.JAYACHANDRAN,J.

and C.KUMARAPPAN,J.

When the matter came up for consideration before this Court on 11.03.2024, adjournment was sought for on behalf of the petitioner and this Court passed the following order:

“When the Court is about to dismiss the Writ Petition, learned counsel represents that she is only a representing counsel. Learned counsel on record is not well and not able to attend the Court. Post the matter on 18.03.2024.”
2. Today, again some other counsel represents the counsel on record and seeks adjournment by stating that the counsel on record is hospitalized.
3. The present Writ Petition is filed by a remand prisoner confined at Trichy Central Prison. His grievance is that whenever he attends the Court Page 2 of 7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD).No.3814 of 2024 and returns to the prison with escort, he is subjected to inhuman act by the prison authorities. He is checked by removing his dress and only thereafter, permitted to enter the Cell. Hence, through his counsel, he issued a notice on 15.10.2023 and thereafter, the present Writ Petition is filed.
4. In the affidavit filed in support of this petition, the observations of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sunil Batra Vs. Delhi Administration reported in AIR 1980 SC 1579 have been extensively extracted, besides the Tamil Nadu Prison Rules and the Prison Manual of Pondicherry.
5. No doubt, the prisoners have all rights of human as well as that of citizen. There cannot be any inhuman treatment or unlawful subjugation of the prisoner. However, neither the representation sent through the counsel nor the representation sent through the mother of the remand prisoner does not disclose any deprivation of fundamental rights or human rights. A representation is sent by one J.Vijayaraja, Advocate, who is also incidentally the counsel on record in this Writ Petition. In the said representation, it is stated that prisoners are compelled to purchase eateries sold in the prison Page 3 of 7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD).No.3814 of 2024 canteen and at the same time, they are not provided with pocket diary to make note of things like soap, comb, oil, toothpaste provided by their friends and relatives, who visit them in the prison. The grievance of the remand prisoner exposed through the counsel is particularly the act of the prison authorities taking note of cell phone numbers of the visitors. Apart from that, there are also certain vague and general allegations that the provisions of the Prison Manual and the Prison Act are not followed and basic amenities are deprived to the prisoners in prison.
6. This Court is apprised of the fact that pursuant to the directions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, the Judicial Officers are mandated to visit the prisons periodically and send report to the High Court and the High Court through the Administrative Judges and Portfolio Judges are directed to peruse the report and take necessary action. As far as the body search of a person, who is admitted in prison, it is a fundamental mandatory requirement both for the safety of the prisoner inside and the prison authorities. Body search while admitting a prisoner inside a prison is common to all and it cannot be doubted or termed as an inhuman act. Page 4 of 7

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD).No.3814 of 2024

7. The allegations of the petitioner are either wild, bald, unspecific or unsustainable. The Courts have time and again made observations and issued directions to the prison authorities as to how the prisoners should be treated. The Courts have never intended to compromise the safety and security of the prison. Having come to know about the cases of illegal exchange of drug inside the prison, use of cell phones and hiding with weapons smuggled from outside, minimum care and caution taken by the prison authorities cannot be faulted. In fact, the Writ Petition is filed with an ulterior motive to put spokes on the prison authority's discharge of duty in the manner known to law. Hence, the Writ Petition is dismissed as devoid of merits. There shall be no order as to costs.





                                                                         (G.J.,J.) (C.K.,J.)
                                                                             18.03.2024
                     NCC      : Yes / No
                     Index    : Yes / No
                     Internet : Yes / No
                     Lm




                     Page 5 of 7



https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
                                                                W.P.(MD).No.3814 of 2024

                     To
                     1.The Director General of Prison,
                       Directorate of the Central Prison,
                       Chennai.

2.The Deputy Director General of Prison, Directorate of the Central Prison, Chennai.

3.The Superintendent of Prison, Trichy Central Prison, Trichy.

4.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

Page 6 of 7

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD).No.3814 of 2024 DR.G.JAYACHANDRAN,J.

and C.KUMARAPPAN,J.

Lm W.P.(MD).No.3814 of 2024 18.03.2024 Page 7 of 7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis