PREM SHANKAR SHUKLA vs DELHI ADMINISTRATION. Supreme Court, 29-04-1980
| Court | Supreme Court (India) |
| Judge | KRISHNAIYER,V.R. |
| Docket Number | Writ Petition (Civil) 1079 of 1979 |
| Date | 29 April 1980 |
| Parties | PREM SHANKAR SHUKLADELHI ADMINISTRATION |
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 23
PETITIONER:
PREM SHANKAR SHUKLA
Vs.
RESPONDENT:
DELHI ADMINISTRATION
DATE OF JUDGMENT29/04/1980
BENCH:
KRISHNAIYER, V.R.
BENCH:
KRISHNAIYER, V.R.
PATHAK, R.S.
REDDY, O. CHINNAPPA (J)
CITATION:
1980 AIR 1535 1980 SCR (3) 855
1980 SCC (3) 526
CITATOR INFO :
F 1988 SC1768 (2)
A 1991 SC2176 (41)
ACT:
Human justice vis-a-vis Detention Jurisprudence-
Manacling a man accused at an offence, constitutional
validity of-Constitution of India Articles 14, 19 and 21-
Issuance of Writ of Habeas Corpus for human Justice under
Article 32 of the Constitution-Universal Declaration of
Human Rights, 1948 Articles 5 and 10 read with norms in part
III and the provisions in the Prisoners (Attendance in
Courts) Act, 1955-Punjab Police Rules, 1934, Vol. III
Chap. 25. Rule 26: 22, 23.
HEADNOTE:
Allowing the petition the Court
^
HELD: Per Iyer J. (on behalf of Chinnappa Reddy J. and
himself).
1. The guarantee of human dignity forms part of an
Constitutional culture and the positive provisions of
Articles 14, 19 and 21 spring into action to disshackle any
man since to manacle man is more than to mortify him; it is
to dehumanize him and, therefore, to violate his very
personhood, too often using the mask of ’dangerousness’ and
security. Even a prisoner is a person not an animal, and an
under-trial prisoner is a fortiori so. Our nations founding
document admits of no exception. Therefore, all measures
authorised by the law must be taken by the Court to keep the
stream of prison justice unsullied. [862 D-F, 863 E-F]
Sunil Batra v. Delhi Administration and ors. [1978] 4
S.C.C. 494; followed .
2. The Supreme Court is the functional sentinel on the
qui vive where "habeas" justice is in jeopardy. If iron
enters the soul of law and of the enforcing agents of law-
rather, if it is credibly alleged so-the Supreme Court must
fling aside forms of procedure and defend the complaining
individual’s personal liberty under Articles 14 19 and 21
after due investigation. Access to human justice is the
essence of Article 32. [864 A-B]
3. Where personal freedom is at stake or torture is in
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 23
store to read down the law is to write off the law and to
rise to the remedial demand of the manacled man is to break
human bondage. if within the reach of judicial process. [864
F-G]
4. There cannot be a quasi-caste system among prisoners
in the egalitarian context of Article 14. In plain language,
to say that the "better class under-trial be not handcuffed
without recording the reasons in the daily diary for
considering the necessity of the use on such a prisoner
while escort to and from court" means that ordinary Indian
under-trials shall be rentively handcuffed during transit
between jail and court auld the better class prisoner
856
shall be so confined only if reasonably apprehended to be
violent or rescued and is against the express provisions of
Article 21. [863 D-E, 865 G-H]
Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India [1978] 2 SCR 621 @ 647;
applied.
Vishwanath v. State Crl. Misc. Main No. 430 of 1978
decided on 6-4-79 (Delhi High Court), overruled.
5. Though circumscribed by the constraints of lawful
detention, the indwelling essence and inalienable attributes
of man qua man are entitled to the great rights guaranteed
by the Constitution. That is why in India, as in the similar
jurisdiction in America, the broader horizons of habeas
corpus spread out, beyond the orbit of release from illegal
custody, into every trauma and torture on persons in legal
custody, if the cruelty is contrary to law, degrades human
dignity or defiles his personhood to a degree that violates
Articles 21, 14 and 19 enlivened by the Preamble. [868 A-B,
867 G-H]
6. The collection of handcuff law, namely, Prisoners
(Attendance in Courts) Act, 1955; Punjab Police Rules, 1934,
(Vol. III) Rules 26: 22(i) (a) to (f); 26.21A, 27.12,
Standing order 44, Instruction on handcuffs of November,
1977, and orders of April 1979, must meet the demands of
Articles 14, 19 and 21. Irons forced on under-trials in
transit must conform to the humane imperatives of the triple
Articles. Official cruelty, sans constitutionality
degenerates into criminality. Rules, standing orders,
Instructions and Circulars must bow before Part III of the
Constitution. [872 B-D]
The Preamble sets the human tone and temper of the
Founding Document and highlights justice, Equality and the
dignity of the individual. Article 14 interdicts arbitrary
treatment, discriminatory dealings and capricious cruelty.
Article 19 prescribes restrictions on free movement unless
in the interests of the general public. Article 21 is the
sanctuary of human values, prescribes fair procedure and
forbids barbarities, punitive or procedural. such is the
apercu. [872 C-E]
Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India, [1978] 2 SCR 621 @
647; Sunil Batra v. Delhi Administration, [1978] 4 S.C.C.
494 @ 545; reiterated.
7. Handcuffing is prima facie inhuman and, therefore,
unreasonable, is over harsh And at the first blush,
arbitrary. Absent fair procedure and objective monitoring to
inflict "irons" is to resort to zoological strategies
repugnant to Article 21. Surely, the competing claims of
securing the prisoner from fleeing and protecting his
personality from barbarity have to be harmonized. To prevent
the escape of an under-trial is in public interest,
reasonable, just and cannot, by itself be castigated. But to
bind a man hand and foot, fetter his limbs with hoops of
steel, shuffle him along in the streets and stand him for
Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI
Get Started for FreeUnlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations