Meghalaya State Legal Services Authority vs State of Meghalaya & Ors.

We have heard Shri HS Thangkhiew, learned senior counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Advocate, Ms. P Agarwal for the State

respondents.

The Meghalaya State Legal Services Authority, which is a Statutory body under the Legal Services Authority Act, 1987 has filed this petition

under Article 226 of the Constitution in the nature of public interest litigation bringing to the knowledge of the Court with regard to the Under Trial

Prisoners [UTPs] languishing in jail for a considerable period of time without any lawful remand or detention orders. According to the petitioner,

such illegal detention without any remand order was in flagrant violation of the fundamental rights guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of

India as well as in gross breach of Section 167(2)(i) and (ii) read with Section 309 of the Criminal Procedure Code. The petitioner, therefore,

prayed for a variety of reliefs, which is extracted hereunder:

That the instant writ petition has been filed bona fide and for the ends of justice.

In the premises aforesaid it is humbly prayed that Your Lordship may be graciously pleased to admit the instant writ petition, call for the records

and be please to issue a Rule upon the respondents to show cause as to why a writ in the nature of Habeous Corpus/ or appropriate writ

or/directions should not be issued:

a) Directing the respondents to release all the UTPs of East Jaintia Hills District, Khliehriat, without remand orders from the Khliehriat Court,

detained in Jowai District Jail.

b) Directing the respondents to produce all the UTPs of East Jaintia Hills District, Khliehriat before the Khliehriat Court in compliance with the

procedure provided under Cr.P.C. or/other relevant law.

c) Directing the respondents to take appropriate action against the erring official responsible for detention of the UTPs of East Jaintia Hills District,

Khliehriat without remand orders from the Khliehriat Court in Jowai District Jail.

d) Directing the State respondents to empower the Court of Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, by a Notification under Section 304(3) of the Cr.P.C.,

to appoint a lawyer at the expense of the State for legal assistance/legal representation to the accused produced before the Magistrate in case the

accused is not represented by their counsel or financially weak to appoint a counsel of their choice.

And on cause or causes being shown and after hearing the parties be pleased to make the Rule absolute and/or pass such further or other order or

orders as your Lordships may deem fit and proper. And for which act of kindness the humble petitioner as in duty bound shall every pray.

During the pendency of this writ petition, various directions were issued from time to time and the Under Trial Prisoners [UTPs] without any

lawful remand or detention orders were released by orders of the Court. Most of the reliefs prayed by the petitioner have now being met.

However, during the course of the writ proceedings, this Court enlarged the scope of the writ proceedings by going into the question of

appointment of proficient prosecutors and lack of proper infrastructure in the District Courts where separation has taken place and also where

separation has not taken place.

We find that necessary facts and details are lacking and therefore it would not be appropriate to deal with such issues in this writ petition. It will

be open to the parties to raise such issues in a separate petition after incorporation facts and details.

In the light of the aforesaid, no useful purpose would be served in keeping the matter pending since the reliefs claimed by the petitioner have

now being met. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of.