MATHU RAM Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE District and Sessions Judge, Selan and Sirmur districts conducted the monthly inspection of the Model Central Jail, Nahan on 5 4 1983. He submitted a copy of his inspection note to this Court for its perusal and record. Para No. 5 of the inspection note which is relevant for the purposes of the present proceedings reads :

(2.) IT appears that the Registrar of this Court called for comments of the Inspector General of Prisons with respect to the inspection note and the comments of the Inspector General of Prisons with respect to para 5 are as follows: Para 5. Under Section 56 of Prisons Act, 1894 and the same incorporated in para 425 of the Punjab Jail, Manual Supdt. Jail is authorised to confine such prisoners in irons (fetters) if he considers it necessary for the safe custody of the prisoners and insecure conditions of the jail building. Naturally it is for the officer in charge at the spot to determine which prisoner is to be fettered. It is the discretion of the Superintendent Jail. In this case the learned Judge straightway directed the jail authorities for the removal of the fetters on the spot. In such administrative matters if the discretion by the Superintendent Jail was not properly used the higher authorities (Departmental) can review the orders. It is the responsibility of the Superintendent Jail to enforce the discipline amongst the criminals/convicts/undertrials who are dangerous and these powers given to him under law need to be upheld.

(3.) THIS is how this case came to be registered as Criminal Revision.