Supreme CourtImage source: PTI
The Supreme Court has strongly condemned Uttar Pradesh and other states for releasing awaiting trial prisoners from jails across the country. The Supreme Court expressed displeasure at states’ lax approach to releasing prisoners. The court said that there will be more than 1,000 awaiting trial inmates in UP jails who have exceeded their sentence. The lawyer said it was a different matter if the quantity was small, but it didn’t matter. If there is a person in prison who is on trial, then he has this rule and his freedom cannot be restricted.
The Supreme Court says we are looking for the last man standing at the wall but we have not heard his voice yet. We are speaking to the same person. The court said states should understand this is not an imminent issue. To do this, a continuous system must be created. The number of bail applications we are seeing here, the court said. In this case, state officials should work with the Legal Services Administration to gather the information instead of copying and pasting.
Supreme Court invokes provisions of Indian Civil Defense Act
In its order, the Supreme Court said that the Indian Civil Security Act (BNSS) provides that first-time offenders are entitled to release if they have served one-third of the jail term for the offense pending trial. The sentence will be reduced by at least half for non-first-time offenders.
The court further said that an under-trial prisoner may initially be charged with a heinous crime punishable by life imprisonment and may later be charged with a lesser offence. It is pertinent for this Court to emphasize that special powers for identification of women prisoners in prisons should be given and in cases where women prisoners are being held, special care should be taken by the concerned Superintendent of Prisons that the women prisoners have become eligible for release under Section 479(1). The court said states that did not respond in the correct format should submit their responses within two weeks.
Affidavit filed under consideration
During the hearing, the Supreme Court considered the affidavits filed by states, including the Uttar Pradesh government, regarding the release of prisoners under trial. Before a bench headed by Justice Hrishikesh Rai, the UP government’s counsel said the data was in Hindi. It takes us two days to translate and submit the affidavit. The information was received from the nodal officer in Ghaziabad.
The Supreme Court expressed displeasure and asked, when did you get the information? We have issued instructions to the Chief Secretary. Now you must understand why we had to call you and when the state and state legal services administration provided information, the government did not respond. We are investigating 75 jails in UP. That’s a lot of prisons, whereas other states only have two or three prisons. Here’s the law that could help you empty overcrowded prisons.
Uttar Pradesh government’s lawyer says – Our state is not on the list
Supreme Court asked UP government’s lawyer, have you seen our order with your own eyes? Because we know you, if you see your order early, you’ll let us know and it’s a thank you from us. The UP government’s lawyer said this happened because UP’s name was not included in the amicus curiae list. In this regard, the court commented that in cases where there are amicus curiae, do the state lawyers think that everything is the work of amicus curiae only?
Lawyers for the UP government said that only 41 convicts have served half of their sentences and are awaiting trial. Only 29 such criminals were imprisoned for the first time. Supreme Court asks if there is data on how many female prisoners are in jails? Amicus said, “We had the opportunity to visit the prison and found that there were women with small children in the prison.” The amicus curiae suggested and stated that a separate list of under-trial female prisoners who were not sentenced to life imprisonment or death penalty could be drawn up. Can we make a list of what else can be done besides this provision?
Supreme Court says – there should be the data you are talking about
The court said you can say the number can only be 29 or 30, but you have to have the data. When you know the court is considering it. During the hearing, the amicus curiae told the Supreme Court that there are many cases pending in Jharkhand as well. The total number of prisoners eligible for release is 23. A total of 17 cases have been brought to court, of which six have been released.
Goa’s lawyer told the Supreme Court that I had submitted an affidavit containing the data last time. The Supreme Court said that what you did was incorrect. We have asked the Chief Secretary for Administration that this is an issue of personal freedom and it has been listed for hearing today. The situation remains the same.
