GOBARDHAN SINGH Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) An alarmingly large number of men and women, children including, are behind prison bars for years awaiting trial in Courts of law. The offences with which some of them are charged are trivial, which, even if proved, would not warrant punishment for more than a few months, perhaps for a year or two, and yet these unfortunate forgotten specimens of humanity are in jail, deprived of their freedom, for periods ranging from three to ten years without even as much as their trial having commenced. It is a crying shame on the judicial system which permits incarceration of men and women for such long periods of time without trial. We are shouting from housetops about the protection and enforcement of human rights. We are talking passionately and eloquently about the maintenance and preservation of basic freedoms But, are we not denying human rights to these nameless persons who are languishing in jails for years for offences which perhaps they might ultimately be found not to have committed? Are we not withholding basic freedoms from these neglected and helpless human beings who have been condemned to a life of imprisonment and degradation for years on end? Are expeditious trial and freedom from detention not part of human rights and basic freedoms? Many of these unfortunate men and women must not even be remembering when they entered the jail and for what offence. They have over the years ceased to be human beings: they are mere ticket numbers. It is high time that the public conscience is awakened and the Government as well as the judiciary begin to realise that in the dark cells of our prisons there are large numbers of men and women who are waiting patiently, impatiently perhaps, but in vain, for justice a commodity which is tragically beyond their reach and grasp. Law has become for them an instrument of injustice and they are helpless and despairing victims of the callousness of the legal and judicial system. The time has come when the legal and judicial system has to be revamped and restructured so that such injustices do not occur and disfigure the fair and otherwise luminous face of our nascent democracy."-- Justice P.N. Bhagwati speaking for himself and Koshal, J. in Hussainara Khatoon (I) v. Home Secy., State of Bihar, 1980 1 SCC 81. We have heard Sri Pravin Kumar Singh learned Counsel for the appellant, and the learned AGA in this bail prayer on behalf of the appellants Govardhan Singh and Ganga Devi who have been convicted by the Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No. 2, Shahjahanpur by her judgment dated 28.6.2005 sentencing the two appellants to imprisonment for life under section 304B, IPC, 3 years R.I. with fines of Rs. 2000 each under section 498A, IPC and 2 years R.I. under section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.

(2.) It may be mentioned that the order sheet discloses that the learned Counsel for the appellant Sri Pravin Kumar Singh had appeared only once earlier when he filed the appeal on 14.7.2005. He never appeared thereafter to press the bail prayer. There was even an order dated 30.6.2008 to the effect that although the appellant was in jail since his appeal was filed, his Counsel has not appeared even when the case was called out in the revised list and that the case be listed in ordinary course. When the case was called out we therefore summoned Sri P.K. Singh who appeared and informed us that although some pairokar of the appellants had taken away the case papers about a year back, but he was prepared to press the prayer for bail on behalf of the appellants. We appreciate this. The cause list mentions the name of another counsel, but he did not appear at all.

(3.) Since it appeared that the Counsel were not appearing because the appellants were too poor to pay their settled fee, we proceeded to examine the judgment and record with the help of Sri P.K. Singh, the appellant's earlier counsel, and learned AGA Sri Vimlendu Tripathi who ably assisted us, for considering the prayer for bail and issuing some further directions.