STATE OF MAHARASHTRA Vs. ASHA ARUN GAWALI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The concern for reformation of prisoners and improvement of prison conditions has been judicially recognised. But the same does not countenance "holding of darbars in prisons by prisoners", "five star hotel comforts for prisoners" or "free entry to and exist from jail" as surface in these cases, that too by statements of admission marked by abashed inefficiency unbecoming of those who are ordained to strictly carry out their duties and responsibilities i.e., state of jail authorities and the highly placed Governmental functionaries. The Bombay High Court while dealing with the legality of order directing detention of one Arun Gawali (hereinafter referred to as "detenu") gave certain directions, to be noted hereinafter.

(2.) These three appeals are interlinked and have their matrix to the Impugned judgment by a Division Bench of the Bombay High Court. The High Court in addition to quashing of order of detention gave the following directions :

(3.) Detenus wife Asha Gawali filed a writ petition questioning legality of the order of detention passed under Section 3 of the National Security Act, 1980 (in short the Act). the directions were given while, as noted above quashing the detention taking note of certan baffling fact situations which came to light while hearing the writ petition and which should sound as nightmares to any law abiding citizen and law enforcing authorities. While the State of Maharashtra questions the directions relating to launching of prosecution, the other two appeals i.e. Criminal Appeal No. 286 of 1998 has been filed by Mr. P. Subramanyam, who was then functioning as Chief Secretary (Home) and Criminal Appeal No. 285 of 1998 has been filed by Mr. Mahadu Govindrao Narvane, who was then functioning as Inspector General of Prisons. Though the judgment has been assailed by the State of Maharashtra no separate appeal has been filed by Mr. S. C. Malhotra, Commissioner of Police Mumbai, Mr. D. M. Jadhav, Mr. M. G. Ghorpade and Mr. L.T. Samudrawar, who were acting as Superintendents of Jail, though the directions given by the High Court also related to them.