Skip to main content

No handcuffing, chaining prisoners without permission: Calcutta HC

The Calcutta High Court on Wednesday directed that no prisoner could be handcuffed or chained without magisterial permission, while asking the West Bengal government to pay compensation of Rs 15,000 to a youth, who was subjected to such treatment at a hospital in Siliguri.

A division bench comprising Chief Justice Arun Mishra and Justice Joymalyo Bagchi ordered that no prisoner could be handcuffed or chained, while directing that in case of prisoners perceived to be dangerous, the police would have to take prior permission of a magistrate for handcuffing or chaining them.

The police could use such measures on its own only when an accused perceived to be dangerous was being taken to the police station following arrest.

A PIL had been moved before the high court claiming that Santosh Sahani was arrested in Siliguri on April 10 during a protest by Left organisations over the death of a student while being taken to jail after courting arrest in a law-violation programme.

Sahani, who had fallen ill, was taken to North Bengal Medical College and Hospital.

The petitioner alleged that Sahani was chained to his hospital bed for 40 hours and was unchained only after the matter was reported in the media. 

Comments

Post a Comment

Most viewed this month

Valuation Report of Jewellery once made is effective for Four Assessment Years

The division Bench of the Delhi High Court in Pr.Commissioner of Wealth Tax vs. Raghu Hari Dalmia held that a valuation report made by a registered valuer once adopted shall be in effect for four assessment years unless an event has occurred whereby the value is increased or decreased. The High Court made it clear that the event of “search” under Section 132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 cannot compel the assessee to undertake a fresh valuation.
2 comments
Read more

The recovery of vehicles by the financier not an offence - SC

Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No. 8907  of 2009 Anup Sarmah (Petitioner) Vs Bhola Nath Sharma & Ors.(Respondents) The petitioner submitted that  respondents-financer had forcibly taken away the vehicle financed by them and  illegally deprived the petitioner from its lawful possession  and  thus,  committed  a crime. The complaint filed by the petitioner had been  entertained  by  the Judicial Magistrate (Ist Class), Gauhati (Assam) in Complaint Case  No.  608 of 2009, even directing the interim custody of the vehicle (Maruti  Zen)  be given to the petitioner vide order dated  17.3.2009.  The respondent on approaching the Guwahati High  Court against this order, the hon'ble court squashed the criminal  proceedings  pending   before  the  learned Magistrate. After hearing both sides, the Hon'ble Supreme Court decided on 30th...
7 comments
Read more

Mere Agreement To Sell The Leased Property To Tenant Would Not Terminate Landlord-Tenant Relationship

In CIVIL APPEAL Nos. 1237­1238 OF 2019, Dr. H.K. Sharma vs Shri Ram Lal, the tenant had objected against the eviction suit filed by the landlord, claiming that the landlord-tenant relationship between them had ceased to exist by virtue of an agreement for sale entered between them and that he has already paid some money in advance based on the agreement. The tenant contented as the landlord-tenant relationship did not exist, the landlord cannot evict him. The matter went through various forums and finally landed before the Supreme Court in appeal. The Supreme Court referring to the judgment in Shah Mathuradas Maganlal & Co. vs. Nagappa Shankarappa Malage & Ors., held that in the instant case the lease agreement included no clauses on the fate of the tenancy. A fortiori, the parties did not intend to surrender the tenancy rights despite entering into an agreement of sale of the tenanted property. In other words, if the parties really intended to surrender their tenancy ...
2 comments
Read more