THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA WRIT PETITION No.23245 of 2009 DATE:03.11.2009 Between: Syed Aale Mohammed Quadri ... Petitioner and The Superintendent, Central Prison, Charlapalli, Ranga Reddy District and another ... Respondents THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA WRIT PETITION No.23245 of 2009 ORDER: This writ petition is filed by the petitioner seeking a Writ of Mandamus to direct the respondents or their subordinates not to keep his father, Mr. Syed Kazam Pasha, convict No.1215, Central Jail, Charlapalli, in chains or handcuffs, when he is reported for review or admitted to hospital for treatment. 2. The case of the petitioner, in brief, is that his father by name Syed Kazam Pasha and others were tried by the I Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Hyderabad, in S.C.No.171 of 1997 for the offences under Sections 148, 452, 324, 397 r/w Section 149 IPC. After full-fledged trial, the learned Sessions Judge found his father guilty, and accordingly, convicted and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months and to pay a fine of Rs.500/-, in default, to suffer simple imprisonment for two months for the offence under Section 148 IPC; to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years and to pay a fine of Rs.500/-, in default, to suffer simple imprisonment for two months for the offence under Section 452 IPC; and also to undergo rigorous imprisonment for five years and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/-, in default, to suffer simple imprisonment for six months for the offence under Section 392 IPC, while acquitting the other accused. Aggrieved by the same, his father preferred an appeal before this Court in Crl.A.No.1317 of 1999 and this Court, by its judgment dated 29.01.2007, acquitted him of the offences under Sections 148, 452 and 392 IPC, but however, convicted him for the offences under Sections 147 and 451 IPC, and accordingly, sentenced him to undergo rigirous imprisonment for a period of six months and also to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- on each of the two counts. As the period of sentence imposed by this Court was only for a period of six months, the Government of Andhra Pradesh issued G.O.Ms.No.78 dated 24.04.2007, commuting the sentence of rigorous imprisonment for six months into fine of Rs.5,000/- and released him. Questioning the aforesaid G.O. and the judgment dated 29.01.2007 passed by this Court, the defacto complaint approached the Supreme Court and filed W.P.(Crl.) No.13 of 2008 and S.L.P.(Crl.) No.3209 of 2008 respectively. Having heard both the cases together, the Apex Court, by its judgment dated 06.05.2009, allowed both the cases and directed his father to surrender before the Sessions Court, within a period of 15 days, for serving the remaining part of the sentences. In compliance thereof, his father surrendered before the I Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Hyderabad, and thereafter he was committed to the Central Prison, Charlapalli, R.R.District, vide convict No.1215. As his father has been suffering from chest pain, breathlessness and other ailments for a long time, the doctors advised him to avoid undue stress both physically and mentally and not to travel any long distance and to undergo coronary angiography. Inspite of the same, whenever his father is reported for review or admitted to hospital for treatment, the police are keeping him in chains and some time handcuffed. Being aggrieved by the same, he filed the present writ petition. 3. Though the learned Government Pleader for Home was directed to file a counter-affidavit, he has not chosen to file the same. 4. Heard both the learned counsel. 5. May be it is true that the father of the petitioner is a convict and committed grave offences, but it does not mean that he should be inhumanly treated. Handcuffing and tying of an accused person or a convict with chains is deprecated by the Supreme Court in Citizens for Democracy through its President Vs. State of Assam and others[1] and passed a judgment in the following manner: "This Court in Batra case (2) and Shukla Case (1) elaborately dealt with the extreme situation when the police and jail authorities can resort to handcuffing of the prisoners inside and outside the jail. It is a pity that the authorities have miserably failed to follow the law laid down by this Court in the matter of handcuffing of prisoners. The directions given by this Court are not being followed and are being treated as a pious declaration. We take judicial notice of the fact that the police and the jail authorities are even now using handcuffs and other fetters indiscriminately and without any justification. It has, therefore, become necessary to give binding directions and enforce the same meticulously. We have elaborately narrated the facts of the present case. We are of the view that there is no basis whatsoever for drawing an inference that the seven detenus who were lodged inside the ward of a hospital were likely to escape from custody. The antecedents of the detenus are not known. There is nothing on the record to show that they are prone to violence. General averments that the detenus are hardcore activists of ULFA and that they are accused of terrorist and disruptive activities, murder, extortion, holding and smuggling of arms and ammunition, are not sufficient to place them under fetters and ropes while lodged in a closed ward of the hospital as patients. Security guards were posted outside the ward. It is not disputed that while in jail the detenus were not handcuffed. They can be deployed around the ward of the hospital where the detenus are lodged. The handcuffing and in addition tying with ropes of the patient-prisoners who are lodged in the hospital is, the least we can say, inhuman and in utter violation of the human rights guaranteed to an individual under the international law and the law of the land. We are, therefore, of the view that the action of the respondents was wholly unjustified and against law. We direct that the detenus – in case they are still in hospital – be relieved from the fetters and the ropes with immediate effect." In the light of the above, this Court has no hesitation to come to the conclusion that the said act of the police shall be deprecated. 6. Accordingly, this writ petition is allowed. The respondents are hereby directed not to resort to inhuman acts of handcuffing and chaining the legs of the petitioner's father by name Syed Kazam Pasha, convict No.1215, Central Jail, Charlapalli, as and when he is taken to hospital or kept in it for the purpose of treatment. There shall be no order as to costs. _____________________________ GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA, J 3rd November, 2009 cbs THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA WRIT PETITION No.23245 of 2009 (Allowed) 3rd November, 2009 CBS [1] (1995) 3 Supreme Court Cases 743