Research › Browse › Judgment

Patna High Court · body

1982 DIGILAW 164 (PAT)

People's Union for Civil Liberties v. State of Bihar

1982-12-09

B.P.SINHA, K.B.SINHA

body1982
JUDGMENT This application has been filed by the People's Union for Civil Liberties through its Secretary Mr. Rajeeva Sharma, Advocate. In paragraph 3 of the petition it has been stated that in the Statesman, an English daily published from Delhi, of October, 14, 1982, a photograph of two tribals who were injured was printed. They were shown lying in the Dumb Sadar Hospital tied through one of their legs to the hospital bed with the help of handcuffs. A prayer has been made that the respondent, namely, the State of Bihar and its officers be directed to remove the fetter of the two injured persons. As earlier directed by this Court, a counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the respondent-State explaining the circumstances in which the two injured persons, namely, Shyam Lal Tudu and Rungta Murmu were put under the fetter in the hospital. In paragraph 8 of the Counter affidavit it has been stated that an instruction has been issued by the Superintendent of Police, Dumka to the concerned Constable and the entire police force in the district not to use handcuff to any of the injured accused persons. It is further stated that one of the two accused persons, namely, Rungta Murmu, who was discharged from the hospital, has already been released on bail by the Sessions Judge, Santhal Paragnas at Dumka. 2. In view of this counter affidavit, Mr. Ravi Shanker Prasad, learned counsel for the petitioner does not want to pursue this application any more. It is, however, expected of the State and its officers that unless there is any compulsive need to fetter a person's limbs, they shall restrain them selves from putting any person under chain. Needless to say that it shall be unreasonable to put a person under fetter unless the State is able to make out that no other practical way of forbidding escape is available, the prisoner being so dangerous and desperate and the circumstances so hostile to safekeeping. 3. The application is accordingly disposed of. 4. Let a copy each be handed over to Mr. Ravi Shanker Prasad, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Bipin Bihari Sinha, J.C. to G.P. VI, appearing on behalf of the respondents. Order accordingly.