AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
The petitioner under article 14, 21 & 226 of the
Constitution of India seeks directions in the nature of writ of
mandamus against the State and Inspector General of Prison to
conduct thorough investigation with regard to the custodial torture
and atrocities by the Jail authorities and inmates at Ahmednagar
against his father and brother.
The facts indicate that Rajaram, father of the petitioner and
his son Rahul, brother of the petitioner were under-trial prisoners as
accused in C.R. No. 88/2010 registered with the Parner Police Station
and were in Jail at Ahmednagar. His father Rajaram was patient of
Diabetes and hyper tension. He was advised a nutritious diet. The
jail authorities did not provide him such diet as prescribed by the
Civil Surgeon whereby the health of Rajaram was deteriorated. On
application presented by Rajaram before Sessions Judge on
07.08.2014, the directions were issued to the Superintendent of Jail
to provide medical aid and diet as prescribed but it was not followed.
The second allegation is about assault. As Rajaram was agitating his
grievances before Inspector General of Prison (R2), Jail
Superintendent - Gawade (R3) and other staff had threatened him.
They were also demanding bribe for providing him diet. During the
said period, one Baban Salve committed suicide in jail due to
custodial torture by Jail Superintendent - D. G. Gawade and B. B.
Shirke and other jail authorities. Rajaram had reported the matter
dt. 11.12.2014 to Sub-Divisional Officer, Ahmednagar and Kotwali
Police Station. The jail authorities were annoyed by the act of
Rajaram and at their instigation hardcore criminals Baban Ghawate,
Prashant Kohli and Babasaheb Nangre launched assault on his father
and brother on 02.02.2015. They were brutally assaulted and
threatened. The Jail Superintendent again called and threatened
Rajaram. There was danger to Rajaram and Rahul at the hands of
jail authorities. Thereafter, Rajaram and Rahul were sent to Yerwada
jail. The police of Kotwali Police Station failed to take cognizance of
complaint received against the jail authorities. Hence, this petition
dt.09.03.2015. On 17.04.2015, it was directed that one JMFC
nominated by Sessions Judge, Ahmednagar would visit the sub-jail
and would make inquiry and submit report. Learned JMFC submitted
his report through the Sessions Judge. Meanwhile, Inspector of
General (Prison) has also conducted inquiry and produced relevant
documents.
It may be stated here that, both Rajaram and Rahul were
transferred to Pune and thereafter they were released on bail. As
such, apprehension if any to their life and limb was over long back.
Heard Shri. Nitin Gaware, learned counsel for the
petitioner and Shri. M. M. Nerlikar, learned APP for the State.
The papers on record, the affidavit in reply of respondent
no. 3 along with relevant documents, circulars and the report of
JMFC as well as Addl. Inspector General of Prison disclose following
facts.
(i) Rajaram and Rahul were arrested in C.R. No. 88/2010 of Supa Police Station on 25.11.2010.
(ii) Rajaram was a diabetic patient, the Civil Surgeon had recommended him medicine Gamer 2 and special diet.
(iii) As per say of respondent no.3-Superintendent (District Prison), special diet is permissible only for patients suffering from serious illnesses like Cancer, AIDS & TB.
He has filed Maharashtra Prisons (Prison Hospital) Rules,
1970, which show that prisoners desirous of having extra medical
facilities in respect of diet or clothing may be allowed to supplement
them at their own cost, provided the Medical Officer considers it
necessary in the interest of the health of the prisoner. We therefore
find that there is no substance in the complaint that in spite of
recommendation of Doctors, Rajaram was not supplied with special
diet for diabetes. He was offered the supply of diet at his own costs.
Besides, as held by one of us (A.M. Dhavale, J.) in State v.
Vikramsing Choudhary [Criminal W.P. No. 718 of 2016] decided on
10.11.2017, Rajaram could have applied to the trial Judge for home
food as he was in custody of the trial Judge u/s 167 Cr.P.C .
Respondent No. 3 has filed a list of food items provided to the jail
inmates with averments that those were sufficiently containing
proteins as per requirement. It may be stated that, for Diabetes, what
is necessary is control over sugar intake from sweet food items and
use of diabetic medicines. Considering the facts and provisions of
law, we find no substance in the complaint that in spite of
recommendation of Doctors, Rajaram was not supplied with special
died as prescribed by the Civil Surgeon.
As far as suicide of Baban Salve is concerned, it is
submitted that the said matter was separately dealt with and it need
not be considered in this case.
The petitioner alleged that Rajaram being
witness/complainant in Baban Salve''s suicide, the jail authorities
instigated hardcore criminals Baban Ghawate, Prashant Koli, Nangre,
Lashkare and others to launch assault on Rajaram and his son Rahul.
Smt. Swati Sathe, Dy. Inspector General of Prison has filed
affidavit-in-reply. Besides, there is report of Additional Director
General of Police & Inspector General of Prison. He has held inquiry
into the allegations against Superintendent D. G. Gawade. He found
no substance in the allegations regarding corrupt practices. He has
filed report submitted by Dy.S.P. (Vigilance Cell), which shows that
after recording statements and collecting documents of several
persons, he found no substance in most of the allegations made by
the petitioner against the jail authorities. He has recorded statements
of four under-trial prisoners, besides Rajaram and Rahul and several
jail guards. He made confidential discreet inquiry with jail inmates.
His report shows that, Rajaram was arrogant and was making
complaints against everybody and was picking up quarrels with other
inmates. His inquiry reveals that, one Chouranginath had admitted
that he had given 3-4 blows of leather belt to Rajaram as he had
spoken arrogantly with him and rushed to assault. He also admitted
that, Chouranginath had given blow of hand on his ear and there was
bleeding from the ear. This incident had taken place on 02.02.2015.
Thereafter, said Chouranginath and Mohan Lashkare were
transferred to sub-jail at Newasa on 03.02.2015. The statement
discloses that, Pravin Popat Kharchand, Sonu Satyawan, Sonkamble,
Chouranginath Laskare at one side and Rajaram and Rahul from
other side had quarrel, verbal exchange and scuffling. The jail
authorities had tried to separate them and pacify them. The inquiry
does not reveal that there was any instigation by Superintendent-
Gawade or other jail guards to the assailants for assaulting Rajaram
and Rahul. The Inquiry Officer after inquiry noted that there was
negligence on the part of Jail Superintendent in not having control
over the situation which resulted into the assault and, therefore, the
disciplinary action was initiated against Superintendent - Gawade.
It is the duty of the Jail Superintendent to see that in the
first place the jail inmates are not assaulted by jail guards or other
inmates. All the jail inmates should be protected from any threat to
their life or limb. If there is assault, there should be immediate
action to prevent further damage. It was the duty of the Jail
Superintendent to refer the injured persons to Medical officer, obtain
medical certificate and submit a report about the said incident to the
Magistrate, in whose court the cases against injured and the
assailants were pending. It is for the Judicial Magistrate to make
inquiry and to take necessary action against such assailants. The
record shows that, though Rajaram and Rahul were assaulted by the
inmates, respondent no. 3 has not provided sufficient protection to
them and after the injuries they were not provided with medical aid.
The record shows that, Rajaram was of quarrelsome nature
and had disputes with jail authorities, but there is no material to
show that the jail authorities had assaulted him. As far as the
negligence noted above is concerned, the jail authorities have
decided to take proper disciplinary action against the jail
Superintendent Mr Gawade. Considering the facts of the present
case, since Rajaram and Rahul are now free birds, they can go to the
Police Station and prosecute appropriate remedies against the
assailants. Since the jail authorities were not the assailants but only
negligent and disciplinary action is initiated against Superintendent -
Gawade, no further directions in this regard are necessary. However,
in order to avoid such negligence in future, we wish to pass following
directions to all the Jail Superintendents.
(i) The jail inmates are in the physical custody of Jail
Superintendent and under-trial prisoners are in the
constructive custody of Judicial Magistrate/Sessions
Judge. It is their responsibility that except restriction on
the liberties, their other fundamental rights should not
be violated. There should not be any ill-treatment or
harassment to them and there should not be any assault
on them either by the jail authorities or by the other
inmates which may threaten their life or limb. All
precautions shall be taken by Superintendent of Jail to
prevent such incidents of assault even in cases where the
victim may be arrogant or of quarrelsome nature.
(ii) In case, any accused person is arrogant or indulges in
abusing or assault, the Jail Superintendent may report
about the same to concerned Judge and may also take
appropriate action as per jail manual but he cannot be
subjected to physical assault by the jail authorities.
(iii) In spite of taking all precautions, if any jail inmate is
subjected to assault by jail guard or other inmates, he
should be immediately provided medical aid in Jail
Hospital. If the injuries are serious, he should be taken
to Civil Hospital or any other hospital for proper
treatment. The report about the said assault should be
submitted to the Judges before whom the cases of victim
as well as the assailants are pending. If necessary, the
victim should be immediately produced before the
concerned Judicial Magistrate who can record his FIR
and direct investigation. Care should be taken to see
that the victim and other witnesses are not subjected to
any pressure so as to refrain them from disclosing the
truth.
(iv) The Jail Superintendent shall immediately take steps to
see that the members of assailant group and the
members of victim group are not kept in the same
barrack. In case there is complaint of assault by jail
guards, the Jail Superintendent shall report the fact to
his superior and shall also see that the same Jail Guard is
not given duty in the barrack where the victim and other
witnesses are kept.
(v) The Judicial Magistrate while recording the complaint of
the victim and statement of witnesses should take utmost
precaution to see that they are not under fear. They
should be assured that they would be kept away from
the assailants and they should be free to disclose the true
facts. The inquiry in such matters should be conducted
expeditiously within a very short time and as far as
possible the cases of such assaults on jail inmates should
be expeditiously decided on priority basis.
(vi) Copy of this judgment may be forwarded to Director
General of Prisons for circulation to all the Jail
Superintendents for proper implementation.
With these directions, we hold that no further action is
necessary in the matter. Hence, the petition deserves to be dismissed
and is accordingly dismissed.