Research › Browse › Judgment

Supreme Court of India · body

1996 DIGILAW 704 (SC)

R. D. Upadhyay v. State Of A. P.

1996-03-19

FAIZAN UDDIN, KULDIP SINGH

body1996
ORDER This public interest petition under Article 32 of the Constitution of India has been filed by Mr. R.D. Upadhyay, an advocate of this Court. It has been highlighted in the petition that a large number of under-trial prisoners have been languishing in Tihar Jail without trail for a very long period. This Court by the order dated November 7, 1994 directed the Superintendent Tihar Jail to file an affidavit giving list of under-trial inmates of Jail who are confined for over a period of one year. sh. Tarsem Kumar, Superintendent, Central Jail, Tihar has filed an affidavit dated February 9, 1996 and has annexed a list giving jail wise break-up of under-trials who have spent more than one year at Central Jail, Tihar, Delhi as on January 25, 1996. The list indicates that there are under-trial prisoners who are in jail for a period ranging from one year to 11 years. Mr. Srivastava, learned counsel appearing for the NCT, Delhi has categorised the list of under-trials offence-wise. The total cases café go rised by Mr. Srivastava come to 1930. The list is as under: S. No. Name of Offence Total Cases 1. Murder 880 2. Attempt to Murder 89 3. N.D.P.S. 264 4. Rape 137 5. Kidnapping 68 6. Dacoity & Robbery 1881 7. TADA 122 8. Dowry & 302 IPC 74 9. Theft 55 10. Cheating 10 11. Arms Act 18 12. Counterfeiting 6 13. Official Secret Act 8 14. Custom 1 15. Escape 1 16. U/s. 326 IPC 2 17. U/s.324 IPC 1 18. Riots 3 19. Extradition Act 1 20. U/s. 354 IPC 1 Total Cases 1930 We have heard learned counsel for the parties. The learned counsel agree that a speedy trial is guaranteed as a Fundamental Right under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. So far as 880 murder cases are concerned, we request the Delhi High Court to nominate/designate Ten Additional District Judges to take up exclusively the trial of these cases. The High Court may consider directing the Additional District Judges, so nominated, to dispose of these cases within a period of six months or so. So far as the cases regarding attempt to murder are concerned, we direct that the cases which are pending for more than 2 years, the under-trials shall be released on bail forthwith to the satisfaction of the respective trial courts. So far as the cases regarding attempt to murder are concerned, we direct that the cases which are pending for more than 2 years, the under-trials shall be released on bail forthwith to the satisfaction of the respective trial courts. Persons facing trial for Kidnapping, Theft, Cheating, Arms Act, Counterfeiting, Custom, Under Section 326 IPC, Under Section 324 IPC, Riots and Under Section 354 IPC who are in jail for a period of more than one year, shall, be released on bail forthwith to the satisfaction of the trial courts concerned. There may be cases where the under-trial persons may not be in a position to furnish sureties etc. In those cases, the trial courts may consider - keeping in view the facts of each case especially the period spent in jail- releasing them on bail by furnishing personal bonds. We make it clear that it shall not be necessary for any of the under-trials to move application for bail. The court shall, suo moto, on the authority of this Court s order, consider the bail cases. This shall be done by all the courts concerned within two weeks of the receipt of this order. We give liberty to all concerned to approach this Court for further directions, if necessary. A copy of this order be sent to the District & Sessions Judge, Delhi by tomorrow. He shall issue the necessary directions in this respect to all the Courts functioning under his jurisdiction. A copy of this order be also sent to the Superintendent, Tihar Jail with a direction that he shall bring this order to the notice of all the concerned under trials. So far as the under-trial accused of the offences under NDPS, Rape, Dacoity & Robbery, TADA, Dowry and Under Section 304 IPC, Official Secret Act, Escape, and Extradition Act are - concerned, the NCT Delhi Administration may consider and take appropriate decision in this respect. We are informed by Mr. N.N. Goswami that the matter is already under consideration of the NCT, Delhi Administration. Copy of this order may be sent to the Chief Justice Delhi High Court for his kind consideration. **************** Parallel Citations of other Journals : R.D. Upadhyay v. State of Andhra Pradesh & Ors., 1996(2) Supreme 768 .