Bandaru Ramulamma vs The Inspector-General of Prisons and Director of Correctional Services and Another

Ramesh Madhav Bapat, J.—This Writ Petition is filed by the mother of the convict viz. B. Ramulamma, under Article 226\\ of the Constitution of India with a prayer to issue a Writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, directing the respondents to send her son i.e. B. Venkatesh @ Bujji to a Borstal School immediately so as to enable him to avail the benefits of the provisions of law contained in A.P. Borstal Schools Act by declaring the inaction of the respondents in sending her son to a Borstal School as illegal, void and arbitrary.

The writ affidavit filed by the writ petitioner herein shows that her son B. Venkatesh @ Bujji was prosecuted for an offence punishable u/s 396 I.P.C. before the III Addl. Metropolitan Sessions Judge in Sessions Case No. 372 of 1992. On evidence the learned Judge convicted and sentenced the son of the petitioner herein to suffer rigorous imprisonment for eight years. Against the said order of conviction and sentence the matter was carried in appeal by filing Criminal Appeal No. 602/93 to this Court and the appeal was dismissed confirming the order of conviction and sentence recorded by the III Addl. Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Hyderabad. Thus the son of the petitioner is undergoing imprisonment which is imposed upon. Now this Writ Petition is filed raising a contention that at the time of conviction the son of the petitioner was above the age of 16 and below the age of 21 and therefore it was contended by the mother of the convict that he should have been sent to a Borstal School to enable her son to get the benefits under the A.P. Borstal Schools Act.

On presentation of the Writ Petition this Court had directed the respondents herein to take the convict to the Osmania General Hospital for ascertaining his age. Now a certificate is produced before me which is dated 4-6-1996 in which Dr. D. Koteswara Rao, attached to the Osmania General Hospital has opined that on the date of issue of the certificate the boy was about 22 years of age. The word used ''about'' itself shows that he is not more than 22 years of age. It means on the date of the conviction and also hearing the appeal, the boy must have been between 16 and 21 years of age. Once this finding is given this Court holds that the son of the petitioner i.e. B. Vekatesh @ Bujji is entitled for the benefits under the A.P. Borstal Schools Act. Therefore, this Court directs the respondents herein to transfer the convict i.e. B. Venkatesh @ Bujji to the Borstal School at Nizamabad so as to enable him to get the benef its deriving out of the A.P. Borstal Schools Act.

With this direction, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs.