MOHAN BHAGWAN PANNA Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule.Mr. Champaneri waives service. The petitioners are prisoners and they are desirous of contesting election to the Jail Panchayat for the internal administration of the Jail and the amenities to the prisoners. The petitioners apprehend that their names will be excluded from the contest and that the prison authorities have umguided and absolute discretion to excluded any name from the contest.

(2.) On behalf of the respondents, it is submitted that internal Jail administration is purely an administrative matter of the prison authorities and prison authorities have formed administrative rules to involve the prisoners in this administration by constituting a Jail Panchayat by giving an opportunity to proper persons to contest election. However, there is no legal or fundamental right in the prisoner to contest the election to Jail Panchayat. Rule regarding the eligibility of a prisoner to contest the election is that the conduct of the prisoner in Jail should be good and that he should have performed tha task assigned to him satisfactorily and that there should be no offences against prison discipline. Sub-para (3) gives discretion to the Superintendent of Jail to exclude any prisoner from the contest if there is doubt about the prison activities of the prisoner even if he may not have been caught in any offence against prison discipline, but is suspected of conducting undersirable activities or inciting others or if he is neglecting and disregarding participation in good and healthy activities a writ directing the Jail Authorities not to prevent the Petitioners from contesting the election to the Jail Panchayat. of the Jail or if the is obstructing in carrying out good activities in Jail. It is, therefore, submitted that there are guidelines to guide the discretion of the prison authorities.

(3.) The prisoners undergo prison sentence after their conviction and they do not have any right to participate in the Jail administration. Jail administration over the prisoners is qualitatively far different from the administration outside the prison. Prison administration has most important aspect of maintenance of Jail discipline and if any prisoner is suspected to be prejudicial to such Jail discipline, the Superintendent has been given discretion to exclude such person from allowing him to contest the election. It cannot be said that the discretion is arbitrary and unguided. This petition is based on mere apprehension that the petitioners would be excluded from contesting the election on unguided discretion. When we find that the discretion is guided and is conferred in the interest of the internal administration of the Jail, this petition must fail. Hence it is dismissed Rule discharged.