Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Case Number
Disposition

remanded

Attorney(S)
  • SATISH PANDEY
  • AJIT SHARMA
Acts
  • Correctional Services Act, 2023.
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Click here to upload
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Case Number
Disposition

remanded

Attorney(S)
  • SATISH PANDEY
  • AJIT SHARMA
Acts
  • Correctional Services Act, 2023.
See more information ...
Smart Summary

Factual and Procedural Background

The present proceedings arise from Writ Petition (Civil) No. 1082 of 2020, filed by Suhas Chakma against the Union of India and others. In an earlier order dated 9 May 2024, the Supreme Court flagged concerns about “open air camps/institutions/prisons,” now referred to in a draft manual of the Union of India as “Open Correctional Institutions.” The Court noted apparent under-utilisation of these facilities and scheduled the matter for further directions. The order dated 17 May 2024 records the Court’s follow-up directions after hearing the learned Amici Curiae and counsel for the National Legal Services Authority (NALSA).

Legal Issues Presented

  1. Whether the existing Open Correctional Institutions across States are being utilised to their optimum capacity and, if not, what corrective measures are required.
  2. What information and best practices should be gathered from States to strengthen such institutions and alleviate prison overcrowding.
  3. Whether any reduction in the land area of functioning Open Correctional Institutions, specifically the Sanganer Open Air Camp in Jaipur, should be restrained.
  4. What modality should govern jail visitation by lawyers, including standardised documentation approved by NALSA.

Arguments of the Parties

Submissions of the Amicus Curiae

  • A model draft manual prepared by the Union of India now refers to these facilities as “Open Correctional Institutions.”
  • Data on record indicate that many of these institutions are operating under different names and are not utilised optimally.
  • Strengthening Open Correctional Institutions will (i) reduce overcrowding in conventional prisons, (ii) aid prisoner rehabilitation, and (iii) mitigate caste-based discrimination within the prison system.

Table of Precedents Cited

No precedents were cited in the provided opinion.

Court's Reasoning and Analysis

The Court accepted the Amicus Curiae’s submission that Open Correctional Institutions are integral to reducing overcrowding and improving rehabilitation prospects. Recognising the systemic importance of the issue, the bench adopted a fact-finding and consultative approach:

  • Directed the learned Amicus Curiae and NALSA’s counsel to craft and circulate a comprehensive questionnaire to all States, seeking data on the status and functioning of Open Correctional Institutions.
  • Identified four States—Rajasthan, Maharashtra, Kerala and West Bengal—where such facilities are “functioning most robustly” and ordered them to share best practices, rules, and experiences with NALSA.
  • Mandated the Supreme Court Registry to forward the order to the Chief Secretaries of the aforesaid States for compliance, ensuring an official channel for data collection.
  • Asked the Ministry of Home Affairs to submit a status report on developments following the Model Prison Manual, 2016 and the Model Prisons and Correctional Services Act, 2023, underscoring the need to align State practice with central policy.
  • Expressly restrained any reduction in the land area of existing open air camps/institutions/prisons, citing a specific proposal concerning the Sanganer Open Air Camp at Jaipur.
  • Approved a revised format, proposed by NALSA, for letters to be used by jail-visiting lawyers, thereby standardising lawyer access to inmates.

Holding and Implications

ORDER: The Court issued multiple directions: (i) preparation and circulation of a questionnaire to all States; (ii) sharing of best practices by Rajasthan, Maharashtra, Kerala, and West Bengal; (iii) Ministry of Home Affairs to file a status report; (iv) prohibition on any reduction of land area of existing Open Correctional Institutions; and (v) approval of a standardised lawyer-visitation letter. The matter is listed for further hearing in the second week of July 2024.

Implications: The order advances a nationwide audit and potential expansion of Open Correctional Institutions, aiming to reduce prison overcrowding and enhance rehabilitation. While no new legal precedent is set, the directives may influence prison administration policies across India and ensure uniform lawyer access protocols in jails.

Show full summary ...
To access the original judgment, please Sign In or Subscribe.

    SUHAS CHAKMA v. UNION OF INDIA

    1

    ITEM NO.69 COURT NO.3 SECTION PIL-W

    S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

    Writ Petition(s)(Civil) No(s). 1082/2020 SUHAS CHAKMA Petitioner(s)

    VERSUS

    UNION OF INDIA & ORS. Respondent(s) (Shri Vijay Hansaria, Senior Advocate (Amicus Curiae) Shri K. Parameshwar, Advocate (Amicus Curiae) (IA No. 105557/2020 - EARLY HEARING APPLICATION, IA No. 95785/2020 - PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES)

    Date : 17-05-2024 These matters were called on for hearing today.

    CORAM :

    HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE B.R. GAVAI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP MEHTA For Petitioner(s)

    Mr. K. Parameshwar, leaned A.C. Mr. M.V. Mukunda, Adv. Ms. Kanti, Adv.

    Ms. Aarti Gupta, Adv.

    Mr. Chinmay Kalgaonkar, Adv. Mr. Raji Gururaj, Adv. Mr. Satish Pandey, AOR For Respondent(s) Mr. Mahfooz Ahsan Nazki, AOR Mr. Polanki Gowtham, Adv. Mr. Kv Girish Chowdary, Adv. Mr. T Vijaya Bhaskar Reddy, Adv. Ms. Rajeswari Mukherjee, Adv. Mr. Meeran Maqbool, Adv. Ms. Archita Nigam, Adv. Mr. Kartikeya Rastogi, Adv. Mr. Inderdeep Kaur Raina, Adv. Mr. Akshay Girish Ringe, AOR

    2

    Mr. Pukhrambam Ramesh Kumar, AOR Mr. Karun Sharma, Adv. Ms. Anupama Ngangom, Adv. Ms. Rajkumari Divyasana, Adv. Ms. R.ajaselvan, Adv. Mr. Raghvendra Kumar, AOR Mr. Anand Kumar Dubey, Adv. Mr. Devvrat Singh, Adv. Mr. Simanta Kumar, Adv. Mr. Varun Singh, Adv. Ms. Rashmi Nandakumar, Adv. Ms. Yashmita Pandey, Adv. UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following

    O R D E R

    1. Vide order dated 9th May 2024 we had flagged the issue with regard to the open air camps/institutions/prisons, etc.

    2. Shri K. Parameshwar, learned Amicus Curiae submits that a model draft manual has been prepared by the Union of India wherein the nomenclature 'Open Correctional Institutions' is used for such facilities.

    3. The data put on record wherein such Open Correctional Institutions are shown to be functioning in different names, would further show that the said institutions are not being utilized to their optimum capacity.

    4. The learned Amicus Curiae submits that strengthening of the Open Correctional Institutions, apart from addressing the present issue of overcrowding of prisons, would also help in the rehabilitation of prisoners and do away with caste

    3

    discrimination faced by them.

    5. Taking into consideration the importance of the matter, we request Shri K. Parameshwar, the learned Amicus Curiae and Ms. Rashmi Nandakumar, learned counsel appearing for the NALSA, to jointly prepare and circulate a questionnaire to obtain information from all the States in respect of the status and functioning of the Open Correctional Institutions.

    6. We direct four States i.e. Rajasthan, Maharashtra, Kerala and West Bengal, where such facilities are functioning most robustly, to share their best practices, applicable rules, guidelines and experience on setting up expansion and management of the Open Correctional Institutions with the

    NALSA.

    7. The Registry shall communicate this order to the Chief Secretary of the States of Rajasthan, Maharashtra, Kerala and West Bengal for compliance.

    8. We further direct the Ministry of Home Affairs to present a status report on recent developments in respect of the Open Correctional Institutions after coming of the Model Prison Manual, 2016 and the Model Prisons and Correctional Services Act, 2023.

    9. We are also informed that there is a proposal to reduce the area at Sanganer Open Air Camp at Jaipur. We thus direct that there shall be no attempt of reduction in area of open

    4

    air camps/institutions/prisons, wherever they are functioning.

    10. Insofar as the modalities for visitation by lawyers in jail is concerned, Ms. Rashmi Nandakumar, learned counsel appearing for the NALSA states that she has modified the format of letter to be filled jail visiting lawyer. The same is taken on record and approved.

    11. List this matter in the second week of July, 2024.

    (DEEPAK SINGH) (ANJU KAPOOR)

    ASTT. REGISTRAR-cum-PS COURT MASTER (NSH)

    Use AI to get other relevant cases.
    Try AI Pro free for 7 days Upgrade to AI Pro

    Comments

    SUHAS CHAKMA v. UNION OF INDIA
    (May 17, 2024)