IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) PRESENT: THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY TUESDAY, THE ELEVENTH DAY OF MARCH, TWO THOUSAND EIGHT ONLY WRIT PETITION No.1401 of 2008 Between: Chidipudi Srinivasa Reddy. …Petitioner. AND The State of A.P., represented by its Principal Secretary, Home Department, Secretariat, Hyderabad and three others. … Respondents Counsel for the petitioner: Smt.A.Gayathri Reddy. Counsel for the respondents: Asst. Govt. Pleader for Home. This Court made the following: ORDER: This Writ Petition is filed for a Writ of Mandamus to declare the action of the respondents in not treating the petitioner as “B-Class” prisoner instead of “C-Class” prisoner as per Rule 1036 of the A.P. Prison Rules, 1979 (for short “the Rules”) as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India. Heard Smt.A.Gayatri Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner, and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home. The petitioner was tried as one of the accused in Sessions Case No.36 of 1993 by the learned Special Judge for trial of cases under the Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989-cum-IV Additional District and Sessions Judge, Guntur; convicted, along with others, for the offence punishable under Section 302 IPC; and sentenced to suffer imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.2,000/-, and, in default, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one month. The petitioner was also convicted for the offence punishable under Section 201 read with Section 149 IPC and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for one year and also to pay a fine of Rs.2,000/- and, in default, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one month. Against the said judgment, the petitioner filed Criminal Appeal No.1023 of 2007 in this Court and the same is pending. The grievance of the petitioner is that in the Central Prison, Cherlapally - to where he was shifted from Central Prison, Rajahmundry on 10-11-2007 - he is being treated as “C-Class” prisoner, and, according to the petitioner, he is eligible for being treated as “B-Class” prisoner. In the counter-affidavit filed by the Superintendent of Central Prison, Cherlapally (respondent No.4 herein) it is, inter alia, averred that under Rule 1036 (4) of the Rules if no order is passed by the sentencing Court about the classification of the prisoner, it should be assumed that the prisoner belongs to “C- Class” and that in the absence of any specific direction by the sentencing Court it should not be presumed that the prisoner belongs to a class higher than “C”. At the hearing it is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that in the judgment, by which the petitioner was convicted and sentenced, there is no reference as to the “Class” in which the petitioner is entitled to be treated. Therefore, in accordance with the above-mentioned rule it is presumed that the petitioner deserves to be treated only as a “C-Class” prisoner. This Court cannot, therefore, give any direction contrary to the above-mentioned rule unless the sentencing Court specifies the “Class” to which the prisoner belongs. In view of the fact that criminal appeal filed against the judgment of the Sessions Court is pending before this Court, liberty is given to the petitioner to move appropriate application in the said appeal in this regard. Subject to the above observations, the Writ Petition is dismissed. -------------------------------------- C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY,J Dt.11-3-2008 MNR