T.S.THAKUR, J. - (1.) This petition has been filed in Public Interest. It seeks a mandamus directing the police authorities not to handcuff or put fetters on the under-trials when they are brought to the Courts or are taken out of jail for any other purpose, except with the permission of the concerned Court/Magistrate. It also prays for a direction to the Courts/Magistrates to verify from the under-trials produced before them whether they have been subjected to handcuffs or the like and if so to command the concerned officers to initiate action against those responsible for doing so.
(2.) WE have heard learned counsel for the parties at some length. The legal position regarding use of handcuffs on under-trial prisoners stands authoritatively settled by a long-line of decisions rendered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court and different High Courts in the country. The decisions of the Supreme Court in Sunil Batra v. Delhi Administration [1978]4 SCC 494 and Prem Shankar Shukla v Delhi Administration [1980]3 SCC 526 have examined at length the question relating to the legality of handcuffing and found that the same in inhumane, unreasonable and harsh. The Apex Court has, in the said decisions, issued several directions to the police authorities as also to the Courts dealing with under-trial prisoners with a view to prevent handcuffing and declared that freedom from handcuff is the rule and handcuffing an exception. In Prem Shankar Shukla's case [supra], the Hon'ble Supreme Court observed :- "We clearly declare - and it shall be obeyed from the Inspector General of Police and Inspector General of Prisons to the escort constable and the jail warder - that the rule regarding a prisoner to transit between prison house and course house is freedom from handcuffs and the exception, under conditions of judicial supervision we have indicated earlier, will be restraints with irons, to be justified before or after. We mandate the judicial officer before whom the prisoner is produced to interrogate the prisoner, as a rule, whether he has been subjected to handcuffs or other "irons" treatment, and, if he has been, the official concerned shall be asked to explain the action forthwith in the light of this judgment". The above decision was reiterated by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in D.K. Basu v. State of West Bengal, 1997(1) RCR(Criminal) 372 : [1997]1 SCC 416 wherein their Lordships of the Hon'ble Supreme Court have summed up the legal position as under:- "We, therefore, consider it appropriate to issue the following requirements to be followed in all cases of arrest or detention till legal provisions are made in that behalf as preventive measures :- [1] The police personnel carrying out the arrest and handling the interrogation of the arrestee should bear accurate, visible and clear identification and name tags with their designations. The particulars of all such police personnel who handle interrogation of the arrestee must be recorded in a register. [2] That the police officer carrying out the arrest of the arrestee shall prepare a memo of arrest at the time of arrest at the time of arrest and such memo shall be attested by at least one witness, who may either be a member of the family of the arrestee or a respectable person of the locality from where the arrest is made. It shall also be countersigned by the arrestee and shall contain the time and date of arrest. [3] A person who has been arrested or detained and is being held in custody in a police station or interrogation centre or other lock-up, shall be entitled to have one friend or relative or other person known to him or having interest in his welfare being informed, as soon as practicable, that he has been arrested and is being detained at the particular place, unless the attesting witness of the memo of arrest is himself such a friend or a relative of the arrestee. [4] The time, place of arrest and venue of custody of an arrestee must be notified by the police where the next friend or relative of the arrestee lives outside the district or town through the Legal Aid Organization in the District and the police station of the area concerned telegraphically within a period of 8 to 12 hours after the arrest. [5] The person arrested must be made aware of his right to have someone informed of his arrest or detention as soon as he is put under arrest or is detained. [6]. An entry must be made in the diary at the place of detention regarding the arrest of the person which shall also disclose the name of the next friend of the person who has been informed of the arrest and the names and particulars of the police officials in whose custody the arrestee is. [7] The arrestee should, where he so requests, be also examined at the time of his arrest and major and minor injuries, if any present on his/her body, must be recorded at that time. The "Inspection Memo" must be signed both by the arrestee and the police officer effecting the arrest and its copy provided to the arrestee. [8] The arrestee should be subjected to medical examination by a trained doctor every 48 hours during his detention in custody by a doctor on the panel of approved doctors appointed by Director, Health Services of the State or Union Territory concerned. Director, Health Services should prepare such a panel for all tehsils and districts as well. [9] Copies of all the documents including the memo of arrest referred to above, should be sent to the Ilaqa Magistrate for his record. [10] The arrestee may be permitted to meet his lawyer during interrogation, though not throughout the interrogation. [11] A police control room should be provided at all district and State headquarters, where information regarding the arrest and the place of custody of the arrestee shall be communicated by the officer causing the arrest, within 12 hours of effecting the arrest and at the police control room it should be displayed on a conspicuous notice board".
(3.) THE directions issued by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Citizen for Democracy through its President v. The State of Assam and Ors.,1995 (3) SCC 743 are also apposite and relevant portion thereof may be extracted for ready reference :- "We direct, all ranks of police and the prison authorities to meticulously obey the above mentioned directions. Any violation of any of the directions issued by us the rank of police in the country or member of the jail establishment shall be summarily punishable under the Contempt of Courts Act apart from other penal consequences under law. The writ petition is allowed in the above terms. No costs".;