Magistrate's Direction for Police Inquiry Under Section 202 CrPC Is Valid; Petitioner Must Await Investigation Outcome: Bombay High Court Dismisses Advocate's Petition as Premature    |     Tribunal’s Compensation Exceeding Claimed Amount Found Just and Fair Under Motor Vehicles Act: No Deduction Errors Warrant Reduction: Gujrat High Court    |     When Two Accused Face Identical Charges, One Cannot Be Convicted While the Other is Acquitted: Supreme Court Emphasizes Principle of Parity in Acquittal    |     Supreme Court Limits Interim Protection for Financial Institutions, Modifies Order on FIRs Filed by Borrowers    |     Kerala High Court Grants Regular Bail in Methamphetamine Case After Delay in Chemical Analysis Report    |     No Sign of Recent Intercourse; No Injury Was Found On Her Body Or Private Parts: Gauhati High Court Acquits Two In Gang Rape Case    |     Failure to Disclose Relationship with Key Stakeholder Led to Setting Aside of Arbitral Award: Gujarat High Court    |     Strict Compliance with UAPA's 7-Day Timeline for Sanctions is Essential:  Supreme Court    |     PAT Teachers Entitled to Regularization from 2014, Quashes Prospective Regularization as Arbitrary: Himachal Pradesh High Court    |     Punjab and Haryana High Court Upholds Anonymity Protections for Victims in Sensitive Cases: Right to Privacy Prevails Over Right to Information    |     Certified Copy of Will Admissible Under Registration Act, 1908: Allahabad HC Dismisses Plea for Production of Original Will    |     Injuries on Non-Vital Parts Do Not Warrant Conviction for Attempt to Murder: Madhya Pradesh High Court Modifies Conviction Under Section 307 IPC to Section 326 IPC    |     Classification Based on Wikipedia Data Inadmissible; Tribunal to Reassess Using Actual Financial Records: PH High Court Orders Reconsideration of Wage Dispute    |     Mere Delay in Initiation Does Not Justify Reduction of Damages: Jharkhand High Court on Provident Fund Defaults    |     Legatee Can Continue Suit Without Probate, But Decree Contingent on Probate Approval: Orissa High Court    |     An Award that Shocks the Conscience of the Court Cannot Stand, Especially When Public Money is Involved: Calcutta HC Reduces Quantum by Half    |     Trademark Transaction Within Territoriality Principle Subject to Indian Tax Laws: Bombay High Court Dismisses Hindustan Unilever's Petition on Non-Deduction of TDS    |     Concealment of Material Facts Bars Relief under Article 226: SC Reprimands Petitioners for Lack of Bonafides    |     Without Determination of the Will's Genuineness, Partition is Impossible: Supreme Court on Liberal Approach to Pleading Amendments    |     Candidates Cannot Challenge a Selection Process After Participating Without Protest : Delhi High Court Upholds ISRO's Administrative Officer Recruitment    |     Invalid Bank Guarantee Invocation Found Fatal to Recovery Claim: Delhi High Court Dismisses GAIL’s Appeal    |     Adverse Remarks in APAR Recorded Without Objectivity and Likely Motivated by Bias: Delhi High Court Quashes Biased APAR Downgrade of CRPF Officer    |    

Every Person’s Life is Precious: Kerala High Court Upholds Dignity of Life for Prisoners, Permits Online Education for Convicts

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a landmark decision on November 3, 2023, the Kerala High Court, comprising Dr. Justice A.K. Jayasankaran Nambiar and Dr. Justice Kauser Edappagath, underscored the constitutional right to live with human dignity, ruling in favor of two life convicts who sought to pursue higher education via online courses while serving their sentences.

The court observed, “The right of a citizen to live with dignity forms a significant part of the right to life guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India,” reflecting the court’s stance on the intrinsic value of human life and dignity, regardless of a person’s circumstances.

The applicants, both convicted under Section 302 of the IPC and serving life terms, had successfully cleared entrance examinations for the LL.B. course. Despite their incarceration, the court has permitted them to attend the course online, facilitated by the respective prison and college authorities. This decision came after careful consideration of the restrictions on online legal education under the UGC Regulations, 2020, and the Bar Council of India’s stipulations for legal education.

“The restriction on liberty imposed by law on a convict does not take away his right to dignity protected by the Constitution,” the bench stated, emphasizing that the denial of physical attendance at the educational institution should not hinder the convicts’ right to education.

In recognizing education as a powerful mechanism for individual advancement and a fundamental human right, the court has taken a significant step towards the reformation and rehabilitation of convicts. The decision also aligns with international norms and the United Nations Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners, reinforcing the importance of education in prisons.

The ruling has been met with approval from various educational and legal experts, citing it as a progressive move towards integrating technology into the criminal justice system and enhancing the rehabilitative aspects of imprisonment.

The case has set a precedent for honoring the rights of convicts to pursue studies, illustrating the court’s commitment to upholding the dignity and fundamental rights of all citizens, including those behind bars.

Date of Decision: 03 November 2023

PATTAKKA SURESH BABU VS STATE OF KERALA       

Similar News