BACHCHE LAL Vs. GOVERNMENT OF UTTAR PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) We have heard Sri Patanjali Mishra, learned A.G.A on behalf of the State of U.P. and Sri Pradeep Tiwari, who appeared for petitioners Ram Singh and Sidh Gopal Dwivedi in Crl. Writ Petition No. 7714 of 2009 and Cr. Writ Petition No. 710 of 2010 respectively.

(2.) Sri Patanjali Mishra, learned A.G.A has filed an affidavit dated 20.12.2010 and also drawn our attention to an affidavit dated 12.7.2010 which has been filed by the authorities at the Naini Central Jail, Allahabad on behalf of the State government. An affidavit has also been filed in Crl. Writ Petition No. 710 of 2010, preferred by Sidh Gopal Dwivedi.

(3.) At the out set, we must express our utter dissatisfaction with the cursory nature of the reply furnished on behalf of the State Government in respect of the 583 lifer prisoners, (earlier wrongly counted as 585 prisoners by the State authorities) who have undergone more than 14 years. After 30.6.2010 only 11 prisoners ( 6 by way of Form A and 5 by way of nominal role) were released. We had expressed our discomfort in our order dated 5.2.2010 that only in 3 cases, nominal roles were accepted and the prisoners were released under paragraph 198 of Chapter VIII of the Jail Manual, and five prisoners had been released on licence on Forms A under section 2 of the U.P. Prisoner's Release on Probation Act, 1938. We, therefore, issued a detailed direction keeping in mind the directions set out by the National Human Commission on 26.9.03 and 8.11.99 and the earlier Division Bench decision of this Court in Mehandi Hasan v. State of U.P, 1996 CrLJ 687 that reports of the S.P., D.M, Probation Officer and Advisory Board should be based on objective considerations and they must pass reasoned orders recording reasons why they are refusing to release a particular prisoner. The opinion must be based on antecedents and conduct in prison and other relevant factors and not be the mere ipse dixit of the authorities concerned. We therefore, asked the government to reconsider the cases of nominal roles and applications in Form A and inter-alia directed the governmental authorities at all levels to follow the time imperatives as laid down in the G.O dated 6.9.2004 both for healthy prisoners as well as for infirm or terminally ill prisoners. We had also directed the Member Secretary Legal Services Authority (LSA), Lucknow to ensure that effective legal aid is given especially in the case of the 583 prisoners who are in jail for more than 14 years and have no person to do pairvi on their behalf and had also directed the LSA to oversee that the on line computerized record set up regarding the status of disposal of cases of prisoners eligible for premature release or release on license is being maintained efficiently, and that time schedules are being scrupulously observed.