Allahabad High Court
Bachchey Lal vs State Of U.P. & Others on 8 October, 2014
Bench: Amar Saran, Vipin Sinha
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 46 Case :- CRIMINAL WRIT-PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION No. - 2357 of 1997 Petitioner :- Bachchey Lal Respondent :- State Of U.P. & Others Counsel for Petitioner :- From Jail,Patanjali Misra Amicus C. Counsel for Respondent :- A.G.A Connected with Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 2773 of 2005 Appellant :- Gobardhan Singh And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Appellant :- P.K. Singh,Manish Chand Umaro Counsel for Respondent :- Govt. Advocate Hon'ble Amar Saran,J.
Hon'ble Vipin Sinha, J.
Mr. D.N. Verma, Special Secretary, Women and Child Development, Mr. Narendra Bahadur Yadav, Joint Registrar (Inspection) High Court, Mr. Tej Pratap Tewari, Secretary UP State Legal Services Authority, Dr Asha Srivastava, Additional Director, Medical and Health, Allahabad, Mr. Daljit Singh Chawdhary, IG (Zone), Allahabad on behalf of DGP, U.P., Mr. Bhagwan Swarup, DIG, Allahabad, Mr. Sharad, DIG (Jails), Headquarters, Lucknow, Mr. Ram Kumar, Under Secretary, Home (Prisons), Mr. Surendra Vikram, Director, Social Welfare, Dr. Jata Shanker Tripathi, Under Secretary, Medical Department, UP Government Lucknow, Mr. Ashok Kumar Mishra, Chief Probation Officer, Women Welfare and Mr. Ambreesh Gaur, Senior Superintendent, Central Jail, Naini, Allahabad are present.
We have heard Shri Akhilesh Singh, learned Government Advocate, Shri Vimlendu Tripathi, learned Additional Government Advocate, Shri Sudhir Mehrotra, learned Special Counsel for the High Court and Shri Patanjali Mishra, learned Amicus Curiae appointed by this Court.
A joint affidavit dated has been filed on behalf of the Home Department and ADG/IG (Prisons), U.P. Charts in proformas 1 to 5 relating to fixed term prisoners whose matters are eligible for consideration for premature release under the Prisoners Release on Probation Act or under the Jail Manual and other matters relating to prisoners, a report of UP State Legal Services Authority, a book relating to the bye-laws and regulations framed by NALSA and a list of para legal workers have been filed by the UP State Legal Services Authority, which are taken on record.
Response to recommendations of TISS and other directions in High Court order dated 28.8.14 According to the affidavit of the Home Department and ADG/IG (Prisons), Headquarters, D.O. letters dated 16.9.2014 have been issued on behalf of the Government by the Under Secretary Home (Prisons) Sri Ram Kumar addressed to the various departments including Home, Law, UPSLSA, Women and Child Development, Medical and Health, Social Welfare Department, DGP, U.P., D.G. Prison Administration and Reform Services and all DMs to ensure compliance of the High Court's orders and to take the steps needed on the excellent 11 recommendations given by the 'Prayas' team of Tata Institute of Social Sciences (TISS), after their 16 member team's 10 day visits in June to central and district jails in 10 U.P. districts as summarized in the High Court's order dated 28.8.14, and for the premature release of the fixed term prisoners.
We are further pleased to note that fresh letters dated 19.9.2014 and 29.9.14 were issued to the concerned departments by Dr. Saroj Kumar, the Special Secretary, U.P. Government to submit information mentioning the point wise recommendations by TISS, and the directions in the High Court order dated 28.8.14.
Improvement in Prison conditions and infrastructure and provision of separate balwadi spaces for children.
As per the directions of the Special Secretary to the Deputy Secretary, Prison Administration and Reform, 4, dated 19.9.14 and 29.9.14 the old buildings are to be identified, repaired and upgraded. Separate balwadi spaces are to be created in all women's sections for children of women prisoners below 6 years in age, preferably located outside the prison walls Clean and hygienic drinking water facilities are to be made available in every barrack of the prison. There should be improvement of ventilation by circulation of fresh air and access to sunlight and electric fans should be installed in sufficient numbers in every prison. The existing toilets should be repaired and provided with sufficient water supply and new toilets should be built inside and outside the barracks. Separate kitchen facilities may be provided for women prisoners wherever possible and separate spaces for running libraries and reading rooms in prisons should be earmarked.
In this context a report of the Headquarters Prison Reform and Administration Services dated 19.9.14 signed by the Senior Superintendent (Headquarters) addressed to the Under Secretary, U.P. Govt., Prison Administration and Reform Section ? 2 (Annexure 4 to the compliance affidavit dated 8.10.14) points out that in the current financial year 2014-15, a sum of Rs. 3.5510 crores has been sanctioned for improvement and upkeep of old prison buildings. For children staying with women prisoners, who are below 6 years, crèche facilities have been provided. Aquaguard facilities for providing pure drinking water have been installed outside 48 jails/barracks. Also in 40 prisons, a total of 1294 clean toilets are being constructed and old toilets are being repaired. For preventing overcrowding of women prisoners in barracks, new barracks are being constructed and separate kitchen facilities for women prisoners have been established in several prisons. It is proposed that libraries and reading rooms be created in the coming financial years.
The Prison Administration may consider providing telephone facilities at fixed times and days to prisoners, for contact with approved persons or lawyers (especially women prisoners) as they desperately thirst for information about their homes and children and about the status of their cases. We would also like a response of the government and the prison administration on installing video cameras with protected access to Courts and the Administration in the barracks and other suitable points for prison security, and for better monitoring and check of human rights violations. As a beginning the latter proposal could be initiated on a pilot basis in a few central and important jails.
We also notice that whereas some jails have extensive computerization and internet access, which results in many administrative and other benefits, including information to prisoners about the status of their cases (especially regarding the position of their cases in the High Court), and which can facilitate constant updating of information about consideration of premature release matters of prisoners which can then be checked by the prisoner or public spirited persons or institutions to ensure transparency and non-discrimination. However these facilities are absent in other prisons and it is high time that the said facilities be made universally available in all prisons. The prisons where the said computerization and internet facilities are available and those where the same are not available and the steps being taken for computerization in particular matters be pointed out on the next listing.
We would like to receive the follow up of the extent of compliance of these directions relating to improvement of prison conditions and infrastructure on the next listing.
Directions for obtaining medical certificates and shifting of juvenile prisoners to observation homes Another letter dated 19.9.2014 has been written by the Special Secretary to the Under Secretary, Prisons Administration and Reforms Section-3 directing them to get medical certificates obtained if the juveniles are below 18 years in age as the team of TISS on their visits to U.P. jails has found some juveniles who clearly appeared to be below 18 years in age lodged in some jails. In the chart in proforma 4 a few such cases have also been identified.
There is also a letter of the ADG/IG (Prisons) and Reforms Services dated 7.11.2013 in which it has been highlighted that if any young prisoners are found to be below 18 years in age, they should be transferred to the Observations Homes after getting their ages ascertained and obtaining necessary orders from the Juvenile Justice Boards under the JJ Act, 2000. The age of the prisoner should be got entered from the Courts on the jail warrants in case it is not mentioned therein. Also information be communicated to guardians of prisoners about the admission to the prisoner to the jail by letters at State cost as per para 686 of the Jail Manual (Annexure 5).
In this regard, we note that although x-ray machines may be available in some prisons, but x-rays are not being conducted by the jail doctors even for ascertaining ages by ossification tests in those doubtful cases where the young offender appears to be below 18 years of age and for other essential purposes for detecting not clearly identifiable diseases of ailing prisoners and that x-ray plates and technicians are not available.
It is accordingly directed that X-ray machines and X-ray plates, technicians and other necessary infrastructure be provided for conducting x-rays in all prisons and a compliance report be obtained from the prison administration and health department on all the aforesaid directions on the next listing.
Directions for improved medical facilities in jails Another letter dated 19.9.2014 has been issued by the Special Secretary, UP, Government to the Principal Secretary, Medical and Health Department, UP asking him to arrange for visiting specialists, such as psychiatrists, skin specialists, gynaecologist and paediatricians from the nearest civil hospital to the prisons on a regular basis.
As per the letter of the Prison headquarters dated 19.9.14 proposals have been submitted to the Health Department for appointment of full time doctors, nurses, and para medical staff and it is suggested that the health department should also be requested to provide psychiatrists, skin specialists, gynaecologists and paediatricians from the nearest civil hospitals to visit the prisons on a regular basis.
We also suggest here that for the mental health and psychological welfare of the prisoners meditation and other such positive techniques of Yoga or Art of living etc. be imparted as are being provided in Tihar Jail and in some other prisons, which have been recommended as salutary measures for the 're-humanization' of prisoners by Justice V.R. Krishna Iyer in his inspiring orders in Mohd. Giasuddin v. State of A.P., (1977) 3 SCC 287, Satto v. State of U.P., (1979) 2 SCC 628, Sunil Batra (II) v. Delhi Admn. (1980) 3 SCC 488 and Rakesh Kaushik v. B.L. Vig Supdt. Central Jail, (1980) Supp SCC 183. We would like to receive further feed back on all the aforesaid aspects for improving medical facilities for the prisoners and improving their mental health on the next listing.
Measures for welfare of children whose mothers are in jail Another letter dated 19.9.14 has been issued by the Special Secretary, U.P. Government to the Director General of Police, UP, Lucknow for issuing a circular making it mandatory for the police to take measures for the welfare of the children left outside, whose mothers are in jail, after inquiring from the woman prisoner if she has minor children and whether adult supervision is provided for these children. In absence of any adult supervision outside, till the age of 6 the child could be kept with his/her mother, who is in custody. For older children or children below 6 years where the mother does not want to keep the child with her, the Child Welfare Committee should look to the welfare of the children. An entry is also to be made in the arrest memo about the action taken regarding the minor children of the woman, to be placed on the record of the court's documents.
It may be mentioned here that the D.G.P, U.P., has also issued an order dated 21.9.14 addressed to all the zonal I.G.s and Regional DIGs for compliance of the aforesaid direction relating to the children of women prisoners left outside mentioned in the High Court order dated 28.8.14.
We would like to have compliance reports from all the zonal I.G.s and Regional DIGs regarding the extent to which the aforesaid direction and the circular of the D.G.P. dated 21.9.14 is being followed in each district. All district judges are also to ensure compliance of this direction and to verify that the necessary entries are being made in the arrest warrants and that the District Probation Officers and CWCs are being directed to ensure the welfare of children of prisoners who are left outside while both their parents are in jail.
Directions for filling up vacant posts of Prison staff, Probation and other officials and for improving welfare of inmates The Special Secretary has directed the Prison Administration and Reforms Department Section 1 to immediately fill up vacant posts in prisons for dealing with the overcrowded situation and overload of work on existing staff. There is also a need to create new posts of female staff such as female jailors and welfare officers within the department for catering to the needs of women prisoners and their children. Full term medical officers, compounders and nursing and para-medical staff are to be appointed in all prisons to take care of the health needs of prisoners.
It is further recommended in the Prison Headquarters Report dated 19.9.14 that the vacant posts of Probation Officers have to be filled up by the Women and Child Development Department and also for appointment of liaison officers for co-ordination between different departments. It is further mentioned that teachers have been appointed for educating the prisoners and where teachers are not available, steps are being taken for appointing the same and the financial estimate for the same is to be furnished. For rehabilitation of the prisoners and for giving them training to improve their income generating capacity on their release from the prison, the social welfare departments are to send such students to the prisons who would contact the prisoners as well as their families. The women prisoners who have children with them are to be given protection under the Integrated Child Protection Scheme (ICPS) conducted by the Women and Child Development department.
For premature release of prisoners, shortage of staff has been pointed as a major difficulty and it is recommended by the Prison Headquarters that new posts should be created.
We would like a detailed further report of the suggestions made by the Special Secretary, Home and the Senior Superintendent, Prisons Headquarters, UP on 19.9.14 from the Home Department, DG Prisons, Child Welfare Department and Social Welfare Department and also the time frame by which the suggestions made in the TISS report are likely to be implemented as are detailed in Annexures 1, 2 3 and 4 of the affidavit of compliance filed on behalf of the Home Department and ADG/IG (Prisons) Government of UP dated 8.10.2014.
Response required on proposal of TISS for creating posts of para-legals and social workers in prisons and for starting a model socio-legal centre for prisoner reform We are of the view that in order to prevent especially first time, non-habitual prisoners from seeking protection and thereafter joining the ranks of hardened criminals, it is important that when such a prisoner enters jail he may be provided legal awareness and aid by specially selected and trained para-legals who are in touch with the police, Courts and lawyers, and that contact of the prisoner with his family be maintained by trained social workers. Hence we would like a positive feed back on the TISS proposal: ?Expression of interest to start model socio-legal guidance and rehabilitation centre for prisoners, released prisoners and families of prisoners.? We would also be happy if the project is outsourced for implementation by TISS, in co-ordination with UPSLSA, or at least the selection of personnel and overseeing of the implementation of the project is carried out by the said bodies. The said action would ensure continual association of TISS, which would be very beneficial for monitoring the conditions of prisons and prisoners in U.P. jails, and for ensuring observance of this Court's orders. This proposal could initially be implemented selectively in a few prisons on a pilot basis. Let a response be submitted on this proposal on the next listing.
Premature release of fixed term prisoners According to the chart in Proforma 1 dated 31.8.14 filed in the High Court in the present on-going writ petition, there were 1044 fixed term prisoners in U.P. jails who are eligible for release on license under Rule 4(3) of the U.P. Prisoners Release on Probation Rules, 1938 as they have undergone 1/3rd of their sentence without remissions. However there are discrepancies and limitations in the tabular information furnished. The table in Proforma 1 relating to the jails falling in Agra region (i.e. the Mainpuri, Urai, Aligarh, Jhansi, Etah, Agra and Mathura district jails and Agra Central Jail) does not mention the period of sentence awarded. On the next listing we would like better information, and apart from the present entries in the chart which mention, the prison name, name of prisoner with father's name, age of prisoner, ST/ Case No., designation of convicting Court with district, and period of sentence, date of jail entry, periods undergone, without and with remissions, level at which application u/s Rule 4(3) pending, and whether the judgment is available from the trial Court. We would like further refinement in the entries, as the relevant column, should also mention the date since which the U.P. Prisoners Release on Probation Rule 4(3) application is pending at the level where the disposal is held up, the date when the application for the judgment was made, and to which Court, (i.e. Whether to the district Court or the High Court), any other reason for non-consideration of the application, example absence of guardians, date when reminder was sent to the Authority where the matter is held up for disposing of the application in Form A under Rule 4(3), date when the copy of the judgment was applied for, (and if the matter is pending in Appeal before the High Court, which has summoned the record) application and reminders for the judgment should also be sent to the High Court. We again reiterate our direction in our orders dated 26.3.14 and 28.8.14 here to the Registry and the District Judges to strictly ensure that the judgements of the trial Courts are available to the Jail authorities and Revising Committees within 10 days of their demand. The authorities should appoint an official guardian such as Probation officers or other officer, or other functionary, if the prisoner is not able to obtain a natural guardian, which maybe the case for an old prisoner who is bereft of family support.
On the date of previous listing a chart dated 8.7.14 was submitted and we have been informed by the Report of the Jail Headquarters, that after receiving recommendations from competent authorities at different levels, only 62 such matters were forwarded by the D.M.s. 41 matters were sent back for curing technical defects, and only 21 matters were considered by the Probation Board, in its meeting dated 19.8.14, 1 matter was deferred, and 20 matters were sent to the government for final orders. The Revising Board is said to have sent some proposals for premature release to the District Magistrates, but not a single fixed term prisoner so far has been prematurely released. This is an extremely unfortunate situation and we would like an explanation from the Home Secretary and the ADG/ IG Prisons, for this poor record in releasing short term prisoners who were eligible for premature release under the relevant provisions and also as to what action has been taken against defaulting DMs and other officers who are responsible for the delays.
It clearly amounts to an inadequate compliance of the direction in the order dated 28.8.14 and of earlier orders for premature release of eligible fixed term prisoners. On the next listing we would like to have a clear position regarding the number of fixed term prisoners who have now been released under Rule 4(3) of the U.P. Prisoners Release on Probation Rules, 1938 and further details as mentioned above should be incorporated in the fresh charts which shall be submitted on the next listing. We would also like to be informed about any steps that are being taken by the State government or the UPSLSA or NALSA for getting the hearing by the Constitutional Bench of the Apex Court in Union of India v. Sriharan @ Murugan, Writ Petition(s) (Criminal) expedited, or at least permit State governments to take up matters for premature release of non-habitual lifer prisoners who have been in jail for more than 14 years, and have crossed 70 years (who number about 153 in U.P., as mentioned in an earlier order in this petition dated 26.3.14, and on occasions they have been in jail for over 25 or 30 years and are 80 to 90 years in age, unable to even walk about without support, and have lost all capacity to commit a future crime), or are ailing seriously, which have all been stayed by interim directions in the aforesaid Criminal Writ by the Apex Court.
Constitution of State and District level Committees for prison matters Annexure 7 to the compliance affidavit is the Office order dated 30.9.2014 issued by the Chief Secretary whereby State Level and District Level Committees consisting of various authorities of the legal, financial, women social welfare, technical education, occupational education, medical and health, basic education, revenue, legal services authority, DGP and jail administration etc. or their nominees have been constituted at the state and district levels. The State Level Committee is to meet every six months and the District Level Committee is to meet every three months. It is directed that these meetings be held with a proper agenda, and with regularity and the problems of prisoners be taken up in a continual and systematic manner, and the State level committee needs to also solve the problems pointed out by the district level committees, which cannot be handled at their levels. Feed back on the extent of compliance of this direction be also reported on the next listing.
Position regarding prisoners who have been granted bail for over 2 months but continue to languish in jail It is singularly unfortunate that we have still not been provided with accurate feed back from the prisons and district courts on the number of prisoners who have obtained bail for over two months, but are not being released on bail for want of sureties or other reasons, and the steps being taken by the State and District Legal Services authorities (chaired by the District Judges) for remedying this situation on the lines suggested in the previous order dated 28.8.14 and other orders, by getting applications moved through legal aid counsel for modifying orders by releasing prisoners on personal bonds, (especially old persons, non-habitual women prisoners) or by reducing the bond amount or number of sureties, or accepting family members with a regular job (but with no financial assets) to stand surety for the prisoner, requiring periodical appearance of the prisoner before Courts or the police stations until he is able to produce persons to stand surety for him on release.
As per an estimate from the chart furnished today by the Jail authorities, (which have not been aggregated in the chart), across jails in U.P., relating to the period up to August, 2014 there would be about 289 such prisoners. But this excludes the 18 districts jails, and a large number of district Courts which have callously failed to send their reports, and have even adopted flimsy excuses as in the Sitapur, Saharanpur, Bahraich, Varanasi district jail and Aligarh that this information is not provided by Courts to the jails. We strongly disapprove of this failure to furnish the required information in breach of our orders which has resulted in such a grave human rights violation and injustice to the prisoners who have secured bail, (who even on a conservative estimate would exceed 300) but are not being released after their bail orders.
We have repeatedly directed that inquiries be made by jail authorities, jail visitor lawyers, and judicial officers who visit jails in a proactive manner in each jail barrack about the presence of any such prisoner who continues to languish in jail after being granted bail for 2 months after the bail order. The matter could be cross-checked from the district Courts from their register or elsewhere, and steps have to be taken for remedying this situation. We also find that there are many discrepancies in the number of bailed out non-released prisoners in the jail charts and the figures from the district Courts. The columns in the tables are also discrepant and have been filled up in an arbitrary manner. Thus in Naini Central there are presently 27 such prisoners, though no information was furnished by the jail authorities. In Fatehpur district jail, 6 prisoners are mentioned but the Court information indicates 19 prisoners. Also the bail relating information is usually provided by the prisoner which could be incorrect if he has wrongly been informed by his pairokar.
It makes a mockery of justice when only rich persons with resources can obtain bail after bail orders, because they can easily find persons to stand surety for them, but the poor prisoner who cannot find sureties on the high bail bonds fixed are penalized and discriminated against and forced to remain in jail for long periods after the bail order. Reports show that some prisoners are languishing in jails for more than 10 or 15 or more years after securing bail.
We would like a better compliance report on the next listing on all these aspects from all district judges after cross-checking with the district prison administration regarding the details of all such prisoners, which must include : the jail detained, his/her name with parent/ spouse's name, the crime sections, the ST/ Case number and Court where case is pending/decided with district, the period spent in jai, the Court which has granted bail with the date of bail order, the period in jail after getting bail, the reasons for non-release after bail, the steps taken by DLSA for facilitating release from jail, if no release despite bail order, the reason for failure to take steps for modifying the bail conditions. It is made clear that this Court may take action on the judicial or administrative side, against defaulting Courts and jail authorities, which fail to send their response to this direction, on the next listing, or are insensitively permitting bail granted prisoners to remain in jail, in large numbers or for long periods after their bail orders. We would like a response from all District Judges on this direction on the next listing The R.G. and the J.R. (Inspection) must ensure compliance with this direction, by all District judges and from all Jails and produce a chart in soft and hard copies, compiling the data from all the districts containing the data and the district and State wise aggregate of the data on the lines mentioned above, regarding all such prisoners who have failed to secure bail 2 months after their bail orders.
Jail Lok Adalats We are pleased by the report of the UPSLSA that 313 Jail Lok Adalats have been held in which 2123 prisoners were released. We would like such Jail Lok Adalats to be conducted at least once a week by competent judicial officers, and minor cases be decided in the jails itself by pleas of guilt or other means with the aid of legal aid counsel. A response on this direction and information about further cases decided in jail lok adalats be also submitted on the next listing.
Affidavits in Jails For the purpose of getting affidavits prepared in jails for prisoners who are lacking support for filing bail applications on their behalf and who require legal aid, it is suggested that the Hon'ble Chief Justice may kindly consider getting powers of Oath Commissioners conferred on Officers of the jail as contemplated under the proviso to Rule 4 of Chapter IV of the High Court Rules, without permitting realization of any fees for the purpose. In this context the Proviso to Rule 4 of Chapter IV of the High Court Rules, which has introduced the specific power by Notification No. 5/VIII-C-177 dt. 2.11.1976 published in U.P. Gazette, Part II dated 4.12.1977 reads as follows:
?Provided that the affidavit verified by the Oath Commissioners of other states, by an officer of Jail in the State of Uttar Pradesh, by the Superintendent-cum-Accountant of the Office of Official Liquidator High court, Allahabad and by the Police Sub-Inspector (M) in the office of the Inspector General of Police at Lucknow on whom powers of Oath Commissioner have been conferred can be presented before the Court without such coupons.?
Legal Aid It is a source of great anguish for us, and reflects the abject failure of our legal aid system when so few prisoners in jails on inquiry agree to seek legal aid. We have noted with dismay in our order dated 28.8.14 that according to the chart dated 8.7.14 only one prisoner above the age of 70 years who had undergone over 5 years in prison asked for legal aid. The reason for this reluctance to accept offers of legal aid is the belief that the legal system and legal aid counsel are incompetent and will not successfully provide relief for the prisoners.
As a response to the repeated positive orders in this on-going writ petition, we have been approached by a team of good and Senior public spirited High Court lawyers, who have formed a Criminal Practitioners Association and who have come forward to offer free legal aid. These lawyers have sufficient work, and are offering legal aid from an inspiration to serve poor prisoners and society, and are not offering legal aid due to lack of work. Likewise the Human Rights Law Network has also provided a list of lawyers from the High Court and district Courts who wish to provide legal aid. We have forwarded these lists to the Registrar General.
For providing effective legal aid, we think that the following measures are needed:
a) Good and successful criminal practitioners practising in the district Courts be approached pro-actively by the D.J.s and the District Legal Services Authorities to provide legal aid at the district levels.
b) Some of these lawyers be motivated to visit the district/ central jails at least once or twice a month in co-ordination with the jail visiting Judicial Officers and to speak directly to the prisoners who desire legal aid and to learn about their problems and to acquaint them of their legal rights.
c) The cases where bails lie or are pending before subordinate Courts be argued by competent district level legal aid lawyers
d) Cases where bails are rejected at the district levels, the district judges or other authorized judicial officers contact the Registrar General/ Officer or the officer in-charge of legal aid in the Registry for providing competent Legal Aid counsel at the High Court level for getting the prisoners' bail application moved before the High Court.
e) The affidavits for the bail application for the prisoners who have no pairokars or whose pairokars are not coming forward to move their bails applications may be drafted by the visiting legal aid counsel, and sworn before a public notary whose expenses are to be meted out by the State/ district Legal Services Authority or they could be sworn free of cost before the Jail Officer who has been given powers of an Oath Commissioner by the Chief Justice, under the proviso to Rule 4, Chapter IV of the Allahabad High Court Rules, hereinabove. A Division Bench of this Court in Sajjan Kumar v. C.L.Verma and others, 2006 (1) ALJ 73 has pointed out the legal efficacy of such affidavits.
f) As a starting point the Jail authorities who constantly interact with the prisoners furnish a list of prisoners who are desirous or deserving of legal aid (looking to their old or young age, ailing, or being a woman whose children are uncared for, or the long period of time spent in jail, or the unnecessary incarceration inspite of the minor nature of the offence), for filing or prosecuting their bail applications before the District Courts or the High Court.
g) We also suggest that lawyers who provide good and honest legal aid services may be honoured by the District and High Court Judiciary, issued certificates of merit and given the status of senior lawyers wherever possible. The legal aid lawyers who engage in malpractices by demanding money from litigants, or who do not appear before the Courts on dates fixed or are ill-prepared may be black listed and removed from legal aid panels
h) Payments be increased for legal aid work which is very low at present and the Court be informed about the proposal of government and UPSLSA in this regard
i) Para-legals be given training on carrying out their work of legal literacy and liaison with the police and Courts We would like a positive response on these directions for legal aid on the next listing from the District Judges (DLSAs), UPSLSA, all Jail Superintendents/ Jailors through the I.G. Prisons, High Court Registry.
Release on bail on personal bonds or reduced surety amounts The district Court or the High Court if they take the view that the prisoner has made out a case for bail on merit, or on the basis of the period spent in jail or on health grounds or on account of family issues or other such factors, could then consider the option of either releasing the prisoner on personal bonds on account of absence of pairokars or being an old person or ailing or a woman, with fixed abode unlikely to abscond, or on reduced bonds or conditionally on the prisoner periodically reporting before the police station or Court, which condition could be relaxed once he is able to furnish the required sureties after his release. This course has been recommended in Moti Ram and others v. State of M.P. (1978) 4 SCC 47, or Hussainara Khatoon (1) v. State of Bihar, (1980) 1 Scc 81 and in earlier orders of this Court in this petition on 28.8.14 and other earlier orders.
List on 8.12.2014.
Let copies of this order be forwarded or placed before Hon'ble the Chief Justice, Hon'ble Chairman U.P. State Legal Services Authorities, Member Secretary, UPSLSA, Member Secretary, National Legal Services Authority (NALSA), all District Judges for communicating to Members of DLSAs, CJMS, Civil Judge, (Senior Division) and other concerned judicial officers, District Legal Aid Counsel, DGP, ADG/IG (Prisons), UP for communication to all Jail superintendents, Law Secretary and LR, Home Secretary, UP., Director General (Medical and Health), UP, Chairpersons and Secretaries of National Human Right Commission and State Human Rights Commission, Director and Chairperson and Professor, Centre for Criminology and Justice, Tata Institute of Social Sciences, Deonar, Mumbai, Director JTRA, Director, NJA, learned Government Advocate, Learned AGA Sri Vimlendu Tripathi, Special Counsel for High Court, Sri Sudhir Mehrotra, learned Amicus Curiae Sri Patanjali Misra, and also to place the same before the R.G., High Court for compliance and submission of feedback on next listing. We hope that the responding authorities or at least high level representatives on their behalf who are capable of taking decisions in the matters and answering the queries that may be raised by the Court shall attend the hearing on the next listing.
The responding authorities are directed to contact the GA/AGA and the Registry (i.e. the R.G. Or the JR Inspections) at least about a week prior to the hearing of the case so that a proper counter-affidavit could be prepared and other assistance rendered to the Court at the time of hearing.
Order Date :- 8.10.2014 Ishrat