PERRARIVALAN Vs. INSPECTOR GENERAL OF PRISONS MADRAS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The prayer in this writ petition runs as follows :

(2.) The case of the petitioner as disclosed in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition is as follows: The petitioner was arrested by the C.B.I. in connection with the assassination of the former Primer Minister Thiru Rajiv Gandhi with charges under Sections 302, 307, 326, I.P.C. and Sections 3 and 5 of the Explosive Substances Act and S. 120-B I.P.C. read with Section 3 of TADA Act, 1987. The petitioner was kept in police custody from 19-6-1991 to 15-8-1991 as per the orders of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Chingleput. He was remanded to judicial custody from 6-8-1991 as per the order dated 16-8-1991 of the presiding Judge, designated court, Madras and admitted in the Special Sub-Jail Chingleput on 16-8-1991. In the Special Sub Jail at Chingleput the petitioner is now kept in a separate cell in solitary confinement under lock and key for 24 hours except for the time required for attending the calls of nature and bathing. The solitary confinement of the petitioner in a separate cell is un-warranted and against the principles laid down by the Supreme Court. Solitary confinement can be resorted to only by way of punishment and not otherwise. When the petitioner is detained in prison he will not loose his constitutional rights and is entitled to all the rights guaranteed under the Constitution and therefore keeping the petitioner in a separate cell in solitary confinement for all the 24 hours is unconstitutional and inhumane and the respondents are liable to be directed not to keep the petitioner in solitary confinement for all the 24 hours in a day. The solitary confinement of the petitioner in a separate cell as mentioned above amounts to illegal detention as there is no order from the competent court imposing the punishment of solitary confinement on the petitioner. Section 31 of the Prison Act permits the under- trial prisoners to purchase or receiving from private sources food, clothing, bed materials and other necessaries. However, the respondents have refused to permit the petitioner to receive food, bed materials and other necessaries from private sources. The respondents have no powers to refuse to permit the petitioner to receive the food, clothing and bed materials from private sources particularly when it is permitted under Section 31 of the Prison Act. The Special Sub-Jail, Chingleput is full of mosquitoes and bed bugs. There is no light within the prison cell and no proper air circulation. No modern amenities are provided in the prison. The petitioner is entitled for the supply of magazines periodicals and newspapers. The petitioner is not supplied with the daily newspapers. The further allegations in the affidavit is that the first respondent has issued instructions to the second respondent that advocates cannot be allowed to interview the prisoner unless they have the vakalath of the particular prisoner in their possession. The first respondent is not competent to issue such instructions. When the petitioner's Advocate went to meet him on 5-9-1991, the advocate was not immediately allowed to interview the petitioner and he was made to wait for two hours, outside the jail gate and then only the advocate was permitted to interview the petitioner. Similarly whenever the parents of the petitioners visited the jail they were also made to wait outside the jail gate for hours together without any reason whatsoever. With the above averments, the petitioner filed the present writ petition seeking the reliefs indicated in the earlier paragraph of this order.

(3.) The respondents 1 and 3 filed a common counter affidavit contending as follows : In the Special Sub-Jail at Chingleput, the persons involved in the assassination of the former Prime Minister Thiru Rajiv Gandhi are lodged. The petitioner is one among them. There are 12 males and 3 females. As per Rule 215 of the Tamil Nadu Prison Manual Volume II, the Superintendent of the Prison is authorised to keep certain categories of prisoners in separate cells. The Special Sub-Jail, Chingleput consists of more than 30 cells which are situated in rows. The petitioner is kept in one of those cells thereby facilitating communication with other prisoners kept in the adjacent cells in the row. Even though the petitioner is kept in a separate cell, he is free to attend his daily routines such as bathing, calls of nature, exercise, having breakfast, lunch etc. Even during this time he can converse with other co-prisoners. However the movement is restricted to the extent it does not affect the overall security of the prison, the other accused as well as his own security. The detention of the petitioner in a separate cell is permitted by the Rules. Keeping the petitioner in a separate cell does not mean the solitary confinement as alleged by the petitioner. The petitioner is allowed daily rations as per the scale prescribed in Chapter XXII of the Tamil Nadu Prisons Manual Volume II. The register maintained in the special Sub-Jail, Chingleput will show the articles such as eatables like biscuits, fruits plaintains etc., brought by the interviewers are handed over to the petitioner on many occasions. The Superintendent of the Special Sub-Jail has supplied to the petitioner the necessary bed materials such as cumbly, coramat and bed-sheet at Government cost. The cells of the special sub-jail, Chingleput have been built according to the dimensions prescribed in the rules and each cell is properly ventilated. The cells are periodically white-washed to eliminate bugs. Each cell is provided with flush out latrine with water facility. The prisoners in the special sub-jail, Chingleput are supplied with one Tamil Daily along with any one of the periodicals mentioned in Rule No. 231 of the Tamil Nadu Prison Manual Volume II (hereinafter called the Rules). Further the petitioners advocate was permitted to interview the petitioner between 6-15 and 16.45 hours on 5-9-1991 (i.e.) immediately on receipt of the application and after proper enquiry.