The speedy trial of the large number of undertrial prisoners (UTPs) in the country is an issue that is close to the heart of Justice Madan B. Lokur, the senior-most puisne judge of the Supreme Court. As he has just two working weeks before he retires on December 30, his impatience with State governments not sharing his concern is understandable.
On November 29, while hearing a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) petition on the subject, he imposed costs of Rs.50,000 each on States that did not share information with the Centre on the number of vacancies in the Forensic Science Laboratories (FSLs) under them. The States include Rajasthan, Odisha, Maharashtra, Goa, Assam, Karnataka and Uttar Pradesh.
Filling up vacant posts in Central and State FSLs on priority was considered as one of the means to speed up investigation and trial of pending criminal cases, in which an FSL report is required to reach a finding on the guilt of the undertrial prisoner.
Additional Solicitor General Aman Lekhi told the bench comprising Justices Lokur, S. Abdul Nazeer and Deepak Gupta that in the Central forensic science laboratories there are 97 posts of Scientific Officers and 67 administrative posts that are unfilled. The Centre assured the bench that steps were being taken to fill up the 97 posts of Scientific Officers and said that some progress had been made in this regard.
The Centre also proposed to fill up 77 vacant posts of Scientific Officer on contract basis. The bench expressed its concern that no timeline had been fixed for filling up these posts. The affidavit to be filed by the Ministry of Home Affairs should indicate the timeline for filling up these posts, the bench directed.
With regard to providing video conferencing facilities to all Juvenile Justice Boards, another proposed reform to expedite hearing of pending cases affecting undertrial prisoners, the Union Ministry of Women and Child Development (WCD) disclosed that it had written to the State governments to provide information.
According to the Centre, the possible reasons for the very large number of undertrials in jails are as follows:
* Slow trial of cases in trial courts
* Frequent adjournment of cases
* Slow investigation
* Deficiencies in legal aid facilities
* Inability to furnish sureties
* Lack of proper escort for production before courts (video-conferencing may help here)
* Video-conferencing not used adequately where available
* Section 436-A of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) not being invoked [Section 436-A CrPC deals with maximum period for which an under trial prisoner can be detained . It says that where a person has during the period of investigation, inquiry or trial under this Code, of an offence under any law (not being an offence for which the punishment of death has been specified as one of the punishments under that law), undergone detention for a period extending up to one-half of the maximum period of imprisonment specified for that offence under that law, he shall be released by the court on his personal bond with or without sureties]
* Undertrial Review Committee meetings not regularly held and where held only petty offenders released
* Multiple cases against accused which hinder his/their release
According to the bench, it is clear that quite a few of these deficiencies pertain to the Centre and unless it takes necessary steps in this regard, the large number of undertrials in jails will continue.
The ASG, however, alleged that there was no meaningful cooperation from State governments in this regard. “The consequence of this is that the speedy trial of undertrial prisoners appears to be remote”, the bench lamented.
The bench noted with concern that large States which have not shared information with the Centre on the vacancies in FSLs include Rajasthan (vacancies about 50 per cent), Goa (about 60 per cent), Assam (about 40 per cent), Karnataka (more than 50 per cent), Maharashtra (more than 50 per cent) Odisha (about 33 per cent) and Uttar Pradesh (about 80 per cent). Of these, counsel for Goa and Maharashtra did not even bother to appear before the bench on November 29.
The bench noted in its order:
“Since learned Additional Solicitor General is right in his submission that there is no cooperation coming from the State governments and this is impacting the criminal justice system, we direct the State governments to provide information to the Union of India at the earliest. In addition, the defaulting States mentioned above, which have not supplied information to the Union of India, are directed to deposit costs of Rs.50,000/- each with the Supreme Court Legal Services Committee within a period of four weeks from today. The aforesaid amount shall be utilised for juvenile justice issues. List the matter in the last week of January 2019.”
With Justice Lokur retiring on December 30, the case will now be heard by a bench presided by another senior Judge of the Supreme Court.
COMMents
COMMents
SHARE