Recovery Of Excess Payment Made By Mistake Is Permissible When Employee Furnished An Undertaking To Refund: Supreme Court Anticipatory Bail Application Under Sec 482 BNSS Is Maintainable Even If No Formal Order Of Arrest Is Passed By CGST Authorities: Allahabad High Court Consensual Physical Relationship Following Three-Year Courtship Does Not Amount To Rape If Marriage Promise Fails: Supreme Court Criminalization Of Civil Disputes | Courts Must Not Engage In Speculative Reasoning While Dealing With Quashing Petitions Under Section 482 CrPC: Supreme Court Mere Recovery Of Tainted Money In The Absence Of Proof Of Demand Is Insufficient To Sustain Conviction Under Section 7 And 13 PC Act: Supreme Court High Court Cannot Quash NDPS Proceedings Merely Relying On Jurisprudence Regarding Evidentiary Value Of Confessional Statements: Supreme Court Extra-Judicial Confession Made While In Police Custody Is Inadmissible In Evidence: Supreme Court Taxing Authorities Must Levy Tax Based On The Form Of Goods At The Time Of Sale, Not On Potential End Use: Supreme Court Punjab & Haryana High Court Orders CBI Probe Into State Corruption Scams After Punjab Police Fails To Act On ED’s Section 66(2) PMLA Referral Section 482 CrPC | FIR Based On Consensual Relationship Gone Sour Cannot Be Sustained To Coerce Marriage: Supreme Court CISF Personnel Soliciting Bribes For Employment Is Guilty Of 'Gross Misconduct' Under Section 18 CISF Act: Andhra Pradesh High Court PIL | State Cannot Use Demolition Powers To Silence Whistleblowers Or Deflect Accountability: Punjab & Haryana High Court Criminal Proceedings Against In-Laws Without Specific Allegations Of Overt Acts Constitute Abuse Of Process: Supreme Court Order 22 Rule 9 CPC | Admission In An Abated Suit Does Not Constitute Estoppel Against Landlord In A Fresh Eviction Proceeding: Calcutta High Court Arbitral Award Cannot Be Set Aside For Non-Adjudication Of Claims Specifically Abandoned By Parties: Delhi High Court Mere Long Possession Is Not Adverse Possession; Defendant Must Prove Hostile Animus To Deny Title Of True Owner: Himachal Pradesh High Court Reopening Of Assessment Under Sec 148A(d) Income Tax Act Cannot Be Based On 'Change Of Opinion' Without Fresh Tangible Material: Gujarat High Court Municipal Authorities Must Initiate Formal Proceedings And Grant Opportunity Of Hearing Before Sealing Premises:  Jharkhand High Court Court Cannot Compel Third-Party To Undergo DNA Test Unless Necessary For Just Adjudication: Madhya Pradesh High Court Trial Court Cannot Defer Bail Application Merely Because A Transfer Petition Is Pending In High Court: Punjab & Haryana High Court Section 108 BNS | Mere Taunts Or Harassment Regarding Not Bearing A Male Child Do Not Constitute Abetment To Suicide: Rajasthan High Court Daily-Wage Employees Treated As Permanent Under 1988 Government Resolution Entitled To Annual Increment Benefits: Supreme Court

Safety of Prisoners Paramount, No Compelling Reason for Transfer: Karnataka HC Denies Consolidation of Inmates at Bangalore Central Prison

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


The High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru has dismissed a writ petition filed by several inmates seeking transfer to Bangalore Central Prison. The petitioners, facing charges in a criminal case, sought consolidation at a single prison for alleged safety concerns and to facilitate easier access to legal counsel, invoking Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India.

Facts and Issues: The petitioners were dispersed across various prisons following an order by a lower court, based on recommendations by the National Investigating Agency (NIA). This transfer was due to security concerns after one of the accused expressed intentions to turn approver, increasing the risk of intra-prison violence. The petitioners claimed that their safety was at risk in their current facilities and that they faced difficulties in accessing legal counsel.

Court’s Assessment: The court found no compelling reason for the transfer, given the state’s measures for prisoner security and legal communication. It highlighted the state's duty to ensure the safety of all prisoners. The court was not persuaded by the petitioners' argument regarding the attack in the Central Jail, Dharwad against one Suleiman, noting that this incident did not directly involve the petitioners. The court acknowledged the state's assurance that it would ensure the safety of all prisoners and directed enhancement of video conferencing facilities in prisons for better legal access, including the provision of headphones to maintain privacy during consultations.

Decision: The writ petition was dismissed. The court rejected the request for the consolidation of the petitioners in Bangalore Central Prison. It emphasized the need to balance security needs with prisoners' rights and directed the State to improve legal communication facilities in prisons and to ensure the protection of all inmates.

Date of Decision: 19th March 2024

ABDUL BASHEER & Others VS INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE (PRISONS) & Others

Latest Legal News