SEWA SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner was awarded some jail punishments by the Superintendent Jail vide orders dated 2-3-1984 and 14.2.1988 under Sections 45 and 46 of the Prisons Act for certain misconducts in jail while undergoing life imprisonment. The petitioner has challenged the legality of those orders mainly on the ground that the proper procedure as provided. under Section 46 of the Act has not been followed, inasmuch as the enquiry was conducted by the Deputy Superintendent/Assistant Superintendent, Jail whereas Section 46 of the Act envisages enquiry by the Jail Superintendent. It is also averred that the alleged confession by the petitioner before the concerned authority is not admissible in evidence in view of section 24 of the Indian Evidence Act.

(2.) THE relevant portion of the order of the Superintendent fail in the case of sentence awarded on 2-3-1984 reads as under :- The prisoner is present. He has been given chance to prove himself innocent in this case. But his offence is proved according to his voluntary written statement. He is awarded the below noted punishment.

(3.) SIMILARLY , the perusal of the impugned order dated 9-3-1988 reveals that the prisoner had confessed before the Superintendent Jail, i. e. before the Superintendent Jail during the proceedings. Thus, it cannot be said that the confession being made to a person in authority is not admissible in evidence especially when there are no circumstances on the file for inferring that there was threat, inducement or promise on behalf of the Superintendent Jail before the petitioner confessed his guilt.