1986 JTR(SC) 482
1986 CriLR 544 ; 1987 CriLR(Cal) 36 ; 1986 JT 907 ; 1986 1 JT 907 ; 1986 2 Scale 865 ; 1987 1 SCC 76 ; 1987 SCC(Cri) 44 ; 1987 KHC 1236
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
P.N. Bhagwati, CJI., Ranganath Mishra, J.
SHEELA BARSE, ANOTHER, PETITIONERS
VERSUS
UNION OF INDIA, OTHERS, RESPONDENTS.
Writ Petition (Criminal) No. 1451 of 1985
decided on November 21, 1986.
Act Referred :CONSTITUTION OF INDIA : Art.21, Art.32, Art.39(f)
Constitution of India,1950 – Detention of Order - District Judge in country to nominate Chief Judicial Magistrate or any other Judicial Magistrate to visit District Jail and Sub-Jail in their districts for purpose of ascertaining how many children below age of years are confined in jail what are offences in respect of which they are charged how many of them have been in detention - Whether in same jail or previously in any other jail - Before being brought to jail in question whether they have been produced before childrens court and if so when and how many times and also directed that each Di strict Judge will give utmost priority to this direction and Superintendent of each jail in district will provide full assistance to District Judge or Chief Judicial Magistrate or Judicial Magistrate in this behalf who will be entitled to inspect registers of jail visited by him as also any other document/documents which he may want to inspect and will also interview children if he finds it necessary to do so for purpose of gathering correct information in case of any doubt – Held, Petition returnable on September - Since allegations made in are of a dubious character and they disclose a disturbing state of affairs in institution being run by it will be desirable not only in interest of inmates of institution but also in interest of institution itself that allegations should be inquired into by State Government and it is for this purpose that we are issuing notice to respondents - Court would like to direct in meanwhile that in order to facilitate inquiry which may be ordered by us after hearing parties records in regard to inmates of institution should be taken possession of by Chief Judicial Magistrate and these records may remain with Chief Judicial Magistrate until further orders of this Court may make it clear that it is on basis of allegations made in petition that court are making this order and court presently express no opinion on correctness or otherwise of allegations made – Order Accordingly
Constitution of India,1950 – Detention of Order - District Judge in country to nominate Chief Judicial Magistrate or any other Judicial Magistrate to visit District Jail and Sub-Jail in their districts for purpose of ascertaining how many children below age of years are confined in jail what are offences in respect of which they are charged how many of them have been in detention - Whether in same jail or previously in any other jail - Before being brought to jail in question whether they have been produced before childrens court and if so when and how many times and also directed that each Di strict Judge will give utmost priority to this direction and Superintendent of each jail in district will provide full assistance to District Judge or Chief Judicial Magistrate or Judicial Magistrate in this behalf who will be entitled to inspect registers of jail visited by him as also any other document/documents which he may want to inspect and will also interview children if he finds it necessary to do so for purpose of gathering correct information in case of any doubt – Held, Petition returnable on September - Since allegations made in are of a dubious character and they disclose a disturbing state of affairs in institution being run by it will be desirable not only in interest of inmates of institution but also in interest of institution itself that allegations should be inquired into by State Government and it is for this purpose that we are issuing notice to respondents - Court would like to direct in meanwhile that in order to facilitate inquiry which may be ordered by us after hearing parties records in regard to inmates of institution should be taken possession of by Chief Judicial Magistrate and these records may remain with Chief Judicial Magistrate until further orders of this Court may make it clear that it is on basis of allegations made in petition that court are making this order and court presently express no opinion on correctness or otherwise of allegations made – Order Accordingly
A.S.BHASME, A.V.RANGAM, B.D.SHARMA, C.V.SUBBA RAO, E.M.S.ANAM, K.RAM KUMAR, KAILASH VASUDEV, R.VENKATARAMANA, S.K.NANDY, Sinha Das
ORDER
1. In this writ application relating to detention of children below the age of 16 years this Court has made directions from time to time. On April 15, 1986, the court expressed its concern about the state of affairs relating to children under detention and directed :
The District Judge in the country to nominate the Chief Judicial Magistrate or any other Judicial Magistrate to visit the District Jail and Sub-Jail in their districts for the purpose of ascertaining how many children below the age of 16 years are confined in jail, what are the offences in respect of which they are charged, how many of them have been in detention - whether in the same jail or previously in any other jail - before being brought to the jail in question, whether they have been produced before the childrens court and, if so, when and how many times and also directed that each District Judge will give utmost priority to this direction and the Superintendent of each jail in the district will provide full assistance to the District Judge or the Chief Judicial Magistrate or the Judicial Magistrate, in this behalf who will be entitled to inspect the registers of the jail visited by him as also any other document/documents which he may want to inspect and will also interview the children if he finds it necessary to do so for the purpose of gathering the correct information in case of any doubt. The District Judge, Chief Judicial Magistrate or the Judicial Magistrate, as the case may be, will submit report to this Court within 10 weeks from today.
This Court again directed by its order dated August 5, 1986 that :
......... every defaulting District Judge who has not yet submitted his report shall unfailingly comply with the direction and furnish the report by August 31, 1986, through the High Court and the Registrar of every High Court shall ensure that compliance with the present direction is made.
2. Notwithstanding our expression of anguish and concern and the specific directions referred to above, it transpires that there has been no compliance from certain quarters. For convenience, we proceed to indicate below the particulars Statewise :
Name of the State Name of the District from where
no report has been received
Assam Barpeta
Lakhimpur
Darrang
Kabri-Anglong
North Cachar
Pragiyotishpur
Manipur Bishnupur
Chandel
Churandarpur
Senapati
Tamenglang
Thoubai
Ukhrul
Meghalaya East Garo Hills
West Garo Hills
Jainitia Hills
West Khasi Hills
Bihar Godda
Gumla
Khagaria
Lotiardagga
Medhapura
Sahebganj
Maharashtra Greater Bombay
Gadchiroli
Akola
Uttar Pradesh Rai Bareli
Mathura
Shahajahanpur
3. Some of the States like, Haryana, Himachal Pradesh, Jammu and Kashmir, Karnataka and Madhya Pradesh have not filed any affidavit though there was a previous direction requiring the States to indicate their stand by filing affidavits.
4. In regard to Sub-Jails, no reports have been received in respect of such jails of 14 districts of Maharashtra. Though this matter was listed on November 14, 1986 for final disposal, an adjournment became imperative in view of the failure of compliance with the directions in the manner indicated above and the matter is adjourned till December 2, 1986. We direct the Registrars of the High Courts of the States in which the districts indicated above are located to ensure compliance with the previous directions by November 30, 1986. We hope and trust that special care will be taken to ensure compliance and this Court will not be forced to take any stringent action.
5. The petitioner has made certain allegations regarding the special schools at Lucknow and Ferozabad. Some allegations have also been made in regard to Amravati Jail. These aspects will be considered on the adjourned date of hearing.
6. We would like to indicate that the Union of India is a respondent and this Court expected that the Social Welfare Ministry would respond to the notice, place its stand before the court and assist it for a proper disposal of the matter. Similarly, the court also expects the Central Social Welfare Board to participate in the proceedings. There has, however, been no response from these quarters.
7. Call the matter on December 2, 1986 for hearing.
ORDER
1. Issue notice on the Cri. Misc. Petition returnable on September 19, 1986. Since the allegations made in the Cri. M.P. are of a dubious character and they disclose a disturbing state of affairs in the institution being run by Gajanan Maharaj Sikshan Sansthan, it will be desirable not only in the interest of inmates of the institution but also in the interest of the institution itself that the allegations should be inquired into by the State Government and it is for this purpose that we are issuing notice to the respondents. We would like to direct in the meanwhile that in order to facilitate the inquiry which may be ordered by us after hearing the parties, the records in regard to the inmates of the institution should be taken possession of by the Chief Judicial Magistrate and these records may remain with the Chief Judicial Magistrate until further orders of this Court. We may make it clear that it is on the basis of the allegations made in the petition that we are making this order and we presently express no opinion on the correctness or otherwise of the allegations made.
2. A copy of the order may be communicated to the respondent as also to the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Amravati.