Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

We have heard learned counsel for the parties at some length. The legal position regarding use of handcuffs on under-trial Civil Writ Petition No.9650 of 2007. ::-2-::

prisoners stands authoritatively settled by a long-line of decisions rendered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court and different High Courts in the country. The decisions of the Supreme Court in Sunil Batra v Delhi Administration, [1978] 4 SCC, 494 and Prem Shankar Shukla v Delhi Administration, [1980] 3 SCC, 526 have examined at length the question relating to the legality of handcuffing and found that the same in inhumane, unreasonable and harsh. The Apex Court has, in the said decisions, issued several directions to the police authorities as also to the Courts dealing with under-trial prisoners with a view to prevent handcuffing and declared that freedom from handcuff is the rule and handcuffing an exception. In Prem Shankar Shukla's case [supra], the Hon'ble Supreme Court observed:-

Notwithstanding the above directions, the police authorities appear to have continued the inhumane and improper practice of handcuffing the prisoners when they are taken out of the jail either for production before the Courts or for medical treatment in the Hospital. This is evident from a Press report appearing in the "Hindustan Times" Chandigarh Edition dated 8th June, 2007 captioned "Cops Chain Juvenile at PGI". The news report, apart from commenting upon legality of the practice followed by the police authorities, shows an under-trial prisoner chained to the bed in the Post Graduate Institute of Medical Education and Research, Chandigarh. This writ petition brings into sharp focus the continuous and blatant disobedience of the directions issued by the Hon'ble Civil Writ Petition No.9650 of 2007. ::-6-::

followed by a regular departmental inquiry in which both the officials, mentioned above, were found guilty and were punished with forfeiture of two years service for violating the instructions regarding handcuffing issued by the higher police authorities. The affidavit also states that Line Officer, Police Lines, Faridkot was also warned for not briefing his subordinates properly while being sent on duty. Besides, detailed instructions have also been issued to all the Gazetted Officers and SHOs to brief their subordinates before sending them on guard duty with under-trials/ accused and they have also been directed to obtain prior permission of the Magistrates to handcuff any under-trial/accused, if the need so arises.

Appearing for the petitioner, Mr. Lakhanpal argued that the law declared by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the cases, referred to earlier, and the directions issued by the police authorities in the States of Punjab and Haryana notwithstanding, handcuffing continues with impunity. He submitted that the police authorities got encouraged in their inhuman treatment towards the under-trials on account of a failure on the part of the Judicial Officers to verify from the under-trials whether they have been handcuffed before they were brought to the Court. He argued that while an under-trial is produced in the Court, handcuffs may be removed but outside the Court, the prisoners are invariably handcuffed which, according to the learned counsel, is contrary to the pronouncements of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the cases, referred to above. He urged that the matter could be remedied by an appropriate direction from this Court to the Courts/Magistrates to take appropriate steps and to verify from the Civil Writ Petition No.9650 of 2007. ::-8-::