RAJEN GAYARI @ G.RIFIKHANG Vs. STATE OF ASSAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners, all Under Trial Prisoners in Sessions Case No. 59(K)/2011 pending in the Court of the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Kamrup at Guwahati and presently lodged in the Central Jail hereat, have collectively posted their remonstrance against the action of the police in regularly handcuffing them while transiting them from jail to the Court premises. According to them, this constitutionally impermissible manner of being escorted to the Court premises is in blatant transgression of their fundamental rights guaranteed under Article 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India. We have heard Mr. M Sarania, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. P.S. Deka, learned State counsel. We have heard as well Mr. A.C. Buragohain, learned Standing Counsel, CBI.

(2.) In elaborating their cavil as above, the petitioners have disclosed that they stand accused in the aforementioned sessions proceeding also being alleged as members of the National Democratic Front of Bodoland (for short, hereinafter referred to as 'the N.D.F.B.') and are being produced before the Trial Court on the dates as fixed by it from time to time. According to them, while being brought from the Central Jail where they are detained to the Court premises, they are always handcuffed by the police. Being aggrieved, they have meanwhile submitted applications before the Trial Court on 12.9.2011 and 22.9.2011 praying for necessary direction to the Senior Superintendent of Police (City) Guwahati to desist from subjecting them to handcuffs while being escorted from the Central Jail to the Court premises. They have alleged that though the learned Court below by various orders had called for a report from the Senior Superintendent of Police (City) Guwahati and had left the CBI at liberty also to file objection, if any, neither such report has yet been submitted nor any order has been passed. The petitioners have inter alia, while reiterating their impeachment of the action of the police in handcuffing them, in substance asserted that in the face of the necessary initiatives for a peace process between the Government of India and the N.D.F.B. and the unilateral ceasefire declared by the latter with effect from 1.8.2011 to facilitate the same, there is no conceivable justification to anticipate that they would either defy the lawful authority of the police or flee from justice.

(3.) The Senior Superintendent of Police (City), Kamrup (Metro) in his detailed affidavit while providing the primary facts disclosing the nature of the involvement of the petitioners in the cases registered against them, has asserted that all of them are hardcore trained cadres of the banned N.D.F.B. outfit who have by their activities terrorized all sections of peace loving Indian citizens. The deponent has highlighted that not only the petitioners are allegedly involved in commission of serious non-bailable offences and are of desperate character, the possibility of their escape from police custody is not ruled out unless adequate measures to prevent the same are taken. Referring to Rule 266 of the Assam Police Manual, Part-III, the departmental authority has admitted that the petitioners are sometimes handcuffed during their transportation from jail to the Court premises so as to ward off any law and order situation that may be triggered due to huge gathering on their dates of production, including their relatives, friends, supporters shouting slogans for their release as well as in support of the banned organization. That meanwhile pursuant to the order of the Trial Court a report had been submitted vide Memo No. V/LC-I(NIA)/2012/933 dated 3.3.2012 is mentioned as well. The deponent has also asserted that resort to handcuffing of the petitioners at times is warranted having regard to the above factors as well as the prevailing ground realities to prevent any attempt on their part to escape from the lawful custody.