HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH Kl“ EHLASPUR DiVISlGN BENCH (30RAM: HONsBLE SHRI RAJEEV GUPTA. C.J. HON’%LE SHRE SUNEL KUMAR SWHA, J. ’7 ’rEt Petition (PHI! No.3718 of 203? Petitioners AE: Prisoners, Central JaiL Ambikapur (CG) VERSUS State of Chhatzisgarh, Through the Secretary, Department of Heme Mantraiaya, DKS Bhawan, Raipur (CG) 2 Inspector General (Jail) Raipur (CG) Respondents 3 Jailor, Ambikapur (CG) Letter Detition iCffice reference} Present : Shri Prafut Bharat Amicus Curiae forthe petitioners Shrt Ktshore Bhaéuri, Addittonat Advecate Genera-for the State / respondents. ORDE? (29 th Jensen, ¢ I: u 9“‘In\ -v w, The fotlowing order of the Court was passed by Raieev Gupta. CJ. Learned counset for the parties are heard. 2) This petition came to be registered on the ietter sent by some of the inmates of Centre! Jaii, Ambikapur aiteging that the Poiice while taking the prisoners to Courts were handcuffing them‘ it 3) in the reply filed on behalf of the respondents on 16.1 1 .2GG7, the anegation made in the letter sent by the inmates of Centre! Jait, Ambikapur in regard to the handcUffing of the prisoners has been ‘ categoricaiiy denied. 4) ‘ An additional affidavit was fiied on behaif of the respondents by Shri PD Verma, Deputy inspector Generai, Jaii, Raipur on 3. 1 2.2OOQ 5) The respondents / State vide order dated (37.12.20D9 were directed to file another additional affidavit on the following aspects of the matter : The affidavit and the documents annexed thereto do not expiain the situation about handcuffing, particulariy, after 2G.Ci62t)07 (the date of receipt of the compiaint from the inmates of Ambikapur Jaii). Shri iviurthy ie directed to file a better affidavit in this regard and explain the situation referring to the preventive measures adopted by the State as per directions of the Supreme Court issued time to time.” 6') ln compliance of the above direction contained in the order dated 07.12.2009, Shri PD Verma, Deputy inspector Generai, Jail, Raipur has fiied his additionai affidavit on 20.01.2DtO. in this affidavit, the steps taken by the respondents / State for preventing/ avoiding handouffihg of the prisoners while taking them to Courts have been spelt out in detaii. 7i I'On due consideration of the submissions of teamed counsel for the parties and the steps aiready takenlproposed to be taken by and 8) padma Sl— Chief Justice The writ petition, thus, stands dispcsed § w y 1 i ‘ ‘ I I » petition now, ‘3). S W Sdl— Judge r Sinha Sunil Kuma is required. d