finds magistrates not paying heed to law
Chandigarh, August 3
An inspection of the Chandigarh jail by the Punjab and Haryana High Court’s Acting Chief Justice Adarsh Kumar Goel has revealed all is not well.
The magistrates were not found adverting to the prescribed mode of law while sending the undertrials to custody. Some youngsters appeared to be juveniles, but nothing had been done to determine this.
Observing that the situation in the Chandigarh jail is not isolated and may be there in other jails as well, Justice Goel also ordered the matter to be treated as a petition on the judicial side.
The Bench, comprising Justice Goel and Justice AK Mittal, also issued a notice of motion to the states of Punjab, Haryana and Chandigarh. The case now stands adjourned till November 30.
Justice Goel observed that: “Inspection of the Chandigarh jail was carried out on July 16 to see the progress of the cases of the undertrials in the background of the directions that all efforts be made to complete the sessions trial, where accused are in custody, within two years and magisterial trial, where the accused are in custody, within six months.
“It was observed that some of the undertrials appeared to be juveniles and necessary steps to determine this aspect were not been taken… the District and Sessions Judge may monitor this aspect and give a report to this court.”
Justice Goel added that: “It was also noticed that the magistrates were not adverting to the mode of law…. In some cases, the power of remand was being exercised beyond 15 days of custody mechanically.
“Under the law, such power can be exercised only on the satisfaction being reached that there were adequate grounds for authorised detention.”
Quoting the law, Justice Goel added as per Section 173 (1), the investigations need to be completed without delay. In case of unnecessary delay, the magistrate may be justified in declining to authorise the detention.
“It was noticed that even in the case of magisterial trials, there was a long delay in completing the investigations…. If the investigation is complete, the court can proceed with the matter and in an appropriate case invoke the provisions of plea bargaining or recording of confession.
“But the delay in investigation without valid justification, when the accused is in custody, may not only be violative of the statutory mandate under the Code of Criminal Procedure, but also under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. This aspect may be required to be dealt with on the judicial side by the way of a PIL,” Justice Goel concluded.
Chandigarh, August 3An inspection of the Chandigarh jail by the Punjab and Haryana High Court’s Acting Chief Justice Adarsh Kumar Goel has revealed all is not well.
The magistrates were not found adverting to the prescribed mode of law while sending the undertrials to custody. Some youngsters appeared to be juveniles, but nothing had been done to determine this.
Observing that the situation in the Chandigarh jail is not isolated and may be there in other jails as well, Justice Goel also ordered the matter to be treated as a petition on the judicial side.
The Bench, comprising Justice Goel and Justice AK Mittal, also issued a notice of motion to the states of Punjab, Haryana and Chandigarh. The case now stands adjourned till November 30.
Justice Goel observed that: “Inspection of the Chandigarh jail was carried out on July 16 to see the progress of the cases of the undertrials in the background of the directions that all efforts be made to complete the sessions trial, where accused are in custody, within two years and magisterial trial, where the accused are in custody, within six months.
“It was observed that some of the undertrials appeared to be juveniles and necessary steps to determine this aspect were not been taken… the District and Sessions Judge may monitor this aspect and give a report to this court.”
Justice Goel added that: “It was also noticed that the magistrates were not adverting to the mode of law…. In some cases, the power of remand was being exercised beyond 15 days of custody mechanically.
“Under the law, such power can be exercised only on the satisfaction being reached that there were adequate grounds for authorised detention.”
Quoting the law, Justice Goel added as per Section 173 (1), the investigations need to be completed without delay. In case of unnecessary delay, the magistrate may be justified in declining to authorise the detention.
“It was noticed that even in the case of magisterial trials, there was a long delay in completing the investigations…. If the investigation is complete, the court can proceed with the matter and in an appropriate case invoke the provisions of plea bargaining or recording of confession.
“But the delay in investigation without valid justification, when the accused is in custody, may not only be violative of the statutory mandate under the Code of Criminal Procedure, but also under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. This aspect may be required to be dealt with on the judicial side by the way of a PIL,” Justice Goel concluded.
No comments:
Post a Comment