Delhi High Court Directing The Concerned Authorities To Take Necessary Steps To Prevent The Spread Of COVID-19 Virus In Prisons

Must Read

Madras High Court Asks the State To Reconsider Number of Seats Allotted for Bcm Category

Mr. Shakkiya filed a Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Indian Constitution to issue a Writ of Mandamus....

Gujarat High Court Directs To Register Name of Petitioners in the Society Records as Owners of Property, as per Will

A single-judge bench of Gujarat High Court consisting of Honourable Justice Biren Vaishnav, because probate wasn’t necessary and that...

If No Complaint Is Filed, No Further Orders Are Required To Be Passed: Telangana High Court

Excerpt In Matlakunta Sundaramma vs The State Of Telangana, on January 8, 2021, the Telangana High Court decided that there...

Gujarat High Court Allows Report Filed by Official Liquidator for Dissolution of the Company

The present report had been filed by the Official Liquidator for the dissolution of M/s AtRo Limited under the...

Parents of Road Accident Victim Entitled To Compensation: Delhi High Court

Justice JR Midha said, “Even if parents are not dependent on their children at the time of an accident, they will certainly be dependent, both financially and emotionally, upon them at the later stage of their life, as the children were dependent upon their parents in their initial years.”

Plea Challenging the AIBE Rules Framed by BCI Filed in the Supreme Court

A Writ Petition was presently filed in the Supreme Court by a newly enrolled lawyer challenging the All India Bar Examination Rules 2010 which have been framed by the Bar Council of India which mandates that an advocate has to qualify for the All India Bar Examination (AIBE) to practice law after enrollment.

Follow us

The present petition was placed in front of the High Court of Delhi to seek directions for taking immediate steps to temporarily release all the under trials and convicts, who are accused of offences where the maximum period of imprisonment prescribed under the Indian Penal Code and other statutes is up to five years and fine, that is, for non-heinous crimes.

The petition only deals with the under trial prisoners and convicts who are lodged in Tihar, Mandawali and Rohini Jails in Delhi. Furthermore, the petition prayed for segregation of inmates who are ailing and provide them with proper medical facilities. The respondents in the present petition are Ministry of Law and Justice, Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, Chief Secretary of GNCTD, Delhi Police and the respondent and Lieutenant Governor of GNCTD.

Submissions by the Petitioner

It was submitted by the counsel for the petitioner that considering the outbreak of COVID-19 pandemic in India, the Government of India and State Governments across the country have directed the people to maintain social distancing. Further, eighty districts in the country, including Delhi, have been directed to carry out lockdown.

Considering the same, it is necessary to bring down the occupancy rate of the Jails in Delhi at the earliest to prevent the spread of COVID-19 in jails. The counsel brought into light the fact that the holding capacity of prisoners in the Jails in Delhi is 10,000, whereas 17,000 prisoners have occupied the Jail at one time. Hence, it is necessary to release such prisoners who can be let out on furlough, parole and emergency parole.

Court’s Observation

The Honourable High Court took into consideration the Order of the Supreme Court dated 16.03.2020, wherein it is observed that immediate steps have to be taken to prevent the spread of COVID-19 virus in prisons across India. For the said purpose, the Supreme Court has also called upon all the Chief Secretaries/Administrators, Home Secretaries, Director Generals of all Prisons and Departments of Social Welfare of all the States and Union Territories to discuss the steps which are being taken to deal with the crisis arising out of the COVID-19. The High Court of Delhi stated that since the Supreme Court is dealing with the same issue which has been raised in the High Court, it is not appropriate for this court to entertain this petition.

The Court also emphasised upon the submission of the learned ASC, GNCTD who stated that “the Home Department of the Government of NCT of Delhi is proposing to issue a Notification in the exercise of the powers conferred to it under Section 71 of the Delhi Prisons Act, to add Rules 1219A and 1243A in the Delhi Prison Rules 2018, after Rules 1219 and 1243, respectively and introduce “60 days parole” in one spell instead of two spells of 30 days each in a year and further, introduce a temporary facility of “special furlough” to such category of prisoners and for such number of days as may be specified in the order, in situations like the threat of an epidemic or natural disaster or for any such situation or circumstances, which warrants immediate easing of the inmate population in the interest of the inmates and the society at large.”

The court also took into consideration the submission of the respondent regarding the proposal to amend Rule 1202 of the Delhi Prison Rules 2018Delhi High Court, Delhi HC Allows Bail Application, Gaucher Disease, Eidgah Old Mustafabad Camp to introduce the expression “emergency parole”, which would give authorisation to the Government to grant parole up to 8 weeks in one spell, in addition to the regular parole.  The emergency parole would be granted in emergency situations like the threat of epidemic, natural disaster or any other situations or circumstances. Further, with respect to under trial prisoners, who are booked in only 1 case in which the maximum sentence is 7 years or less and who have completed minimum 3 months in jail, it is proposed that they shall be granted interim bail for 45 days upon a request made by them, preferably on a personal bond. However, the concerned authorities have not formalised any mechanism to carry it out. 

The Court directed that the undertrial prisoners shall be at liberty to apply for interim bails on account of the current situation and the concerned courts shall also consider the same while making decisions. The court further directed the Government of Delhi and the Delhi Police to take immediate steps to implement the proposals outlined in the decision, preferably within two days. 


Libertatem.in is now on Telegram. Follow us for regular legal updates and judgements from the court. Follow us on Google News, InstagramLinkedInFacebook & Twitter. You can also subscribe for our Weekly Email Updates. You can also contribute stories like this and help us spread awareness for a better society. Submit Your Post Now.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Latest News

Madras High Court Asks the State To Reconsider Number of Seats Allotted for Bcm Category

Mr. Shakkiya filed a Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Indian Constitution to issue a Writ of Mandamus. The petition sought to direct...

Gujarat High Court Directs To Register Name of Petitioners in the Society Records as Owners of Property, as per Will

A single-judge bench of Gujarat High Court consisting of Honourable Justice Biren Vaishnav, because probate wasn’t necessary and that the petitioners were entitled to...

If No Complaint Is Filed, No Further Orders Are Required To Be Passed: Telangana High Court

Excerpt In Matlakunta Sundaramma vs The State Of Telangana, on January 8, 2021, the Telangana High Court decided that there is no requirement of passing...

Gujarat High Court Allows Report Filed by Official Liquidator for Dissolution of the Company

The present report had been filed by the Official Liquidator for the dissolution of M/s AtRo Limited under the provisions of Section 497 (6)...

Parents of Road Accident Victim Entitled To Compensation: Delhi High Court

Justice JR Midha said, “Even if parents are not dependent on their children at the time of an accident, they will certainly be dependent, both financially and emotionally, upon them at the later stage of their life, as the children were dependent upon their parents in their initial years.”

Plea Challenging the AIBE Rules Framed by BCI Filed in the Supreme Court

A Writ Petition was presently filed in the Supreme Court by a newly enrolled lawyer challenging the All India Bar Examination Rules 2010 which have been framed by the Bar Council of India which mandates that an advocate has to qualify for the All India Bar Examination (AIBE) to practice law after enrollment.

Bombay High Court: Mere Presence at the Crime Scene Not Enough for Punishment

The Bombay High Court ruled that it cannot be considered a crime if a person is merely present at the crime scene which falls under the Maharashtra Prohibition of Obscene Dance in Hotels and Restaurants and Bar Rooms and Protection of Dignity of Women Act 2016. It also quashed two First Information Reports (FIR) against two individuals who were arrested in a raid at a dance bar by the Santacruz Police, in 2017.

CAIT Files a Plea Against WhatsApp’s New Privacy Policy in the Supreme Court

Confederation of All India Traders (CAIT) has filed a petition against WhatsApp’s new privacy rules in the Supreme Court. The petition says that WhatsApp which is known to render public services by providing a platform to communicate has recently imposed a privacy policy that is unconstitutional, which not only goes against the fundamental rights of citizens but also jeopardizes the national security of our country.

RTI Activist Files a Plea in Bombay High Court Against Bharat Biotech’s Covaxin

On Saturday, a plea has been filed before the Bombay High Court by an activist stating that Bharat Biotech Covaxin had not been granted full approval but a restricted use in clinical trials according to the Drugs Comptroller General of India. The Company's phase 3 trials are ongoing and the DGCI has not made any data available in the public domain for peer- review by independent scientists.

WhatsApp Emails Delhi HC Judge Asking Her Not To Hear the Plea Challenging New Privacy Policy

The Delhi High Court raised strong objection to an E-mail sent by WhatsApp asking a judge not to hear the plea which challenges its new privacy policy. Justice Pratibha Singh said that the e-mail that was withdrawn later was totally unwarranted as she was anyway going to recuse from hearing the plea which was filed by Rohilla Chaitanya who contends that the new privacy policy of WhatsApp provides 360-degree access to a customer’s virtual activity and is against the fundamental right of privacy.

More Articles Like This

- Advertisement -