Allowed

Aman Sharma v. State NCT of Delhi

Delhi HC19 Nov 2024W.P.(CRL)/404/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court quashed a prison punishment ticket issued for possessing tobacco. The Court held that stopping interviews/mulakat constitutes a major punishment under Delhi Prison Rules, requiring strict procedure and notice. Additionally, penalizing the prisoner for the same offence thrice violated the rule against double punishment.

What did the court decide?

Quashing of punishment ticket dated 07.09.2021 imposing stoppage of mulakat, canteen facility, and inmates call facility.

Aman Sharma Vs State NCT of Delhi — Labour and Industrial Disputes | Delhi HC (2024)

¶1

$~19

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- W.P.(CRL) 404/2024

¶4

AMAN SHARMA .....Petitioner

¶5

Through: Mr. Anup Kr. Das, Mr. Ashish Sareen, Advs.

¶6

versus

¶7

STATE NCT OF DELHI .....Respondent Through: Mr. Rahul Tyagi, ASC, Mr. Sangeet Sibou, Ms. Priya Rai, Mr. Anikate, Advs. ASI Mahesh Pratap, PS Janak Puri

¶8

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASMEET SINGH

O R D E R

19.11.2024

This is a petition filed under Section 226 of the Constitution of India read with Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 seeking quashing of punishment ticket dated 07.09.2021.

¶13

As per the punishment ticket, during the search conducted of the bed of the petitioner, 5 grams of tobacco was found for the purpose of making of bidi. Hence the petitioner was awarded punishment of stoppage of mulakat for 28 days, stoppage of canteen facility for 15 days and stoppage of inmates call facility for 15 days. The punishment was approved by the learned District and Session Judge on 02.05.2022.

¶14

Mr. Das, learned counsel for the petitioner has drawn my attention to Rule 1271(b)(ii) of Delhi Prison Rules, 2018 which amongst other things

¶15

This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 27/11/2024 at 12:28:25

¶16

defines major punishment, which reads as under:-

¶17

“1271……

¶18

(a) Minor Punishments

¶19

(b) Major Punishments

¶20

¶21

II. Stoppage of recreational facilities up to a period of one month or canteen facilities for a period of 1 month or stoppage of interviews for a period of up to three months;”

¶22

He further states that the stoppage of interviews for a period of up to 3 months shall be considered as a major punishment, there is no minimum period and hence any stoppage of mulakat up to 3 months would constitute a major punishment.

¶23

He therefore states that for awarding major punishments, the procedure prescribe under Rule 1272 needs to be strictly followed and the same has been completely ignored. The said Rule reads as under:-

¶24

“1272. For award of major punishment the priosoner should be given notice in writing, calling him to show cause with reference to the alleged violation of Jail rules. The order of punishment should also be communicated to the concerned prisoner.”

¶25

Mr. Sangeet, learned counsel for the respondent states that a punishment of stoppage of mulakat more than 1 month would constitute major punishment.

¶26

I have learned counsel for the parties.

¶27

This is a digitally signed order.

¶28

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 27/11/2024 at 12:28:25

¶29

Rule 1271(b)(ii) reproduced above shows that stoppage of interviews/mulakat up to 3 months would constitute major punishment. The language of the said Rule is clear and there is no ambiguity. There is no minimum period given in the said Rule and hence stoppage of interviews for any number of days would constitute a major punishment and therefore, the Rule 1272 needs to be followed. Hence, the stoppage of mulakat under Rule 1271(b)(ii) i.e. without issuance of show cause is contrary to Rule 1272 and cannot be sustained.

¶30

In addition, Rule 1275 reads as under:-

¶31

“1275. No prisoner should be punished twice for the same offence by the same authority.”

¶32

In the present case, the petitioner has been punished with stoppage of mulakat for 28 days, stoppage of canteen facility for 15 days and stoppage of inmates call facility for 15 days, which is again punishing the petitioner for the same offence thrice which is contrary to Rule 1275.

¶33

For the same reasons, the punishment ticket dated 07.09.2021 is quashed.

¶34

The petition is allowed and disposed of.

¶35

JASMEET SINGH, J

¶36

NOVEMBER 19, 2024/NG

¶37

This is a digitally signed order.

¶38

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 27/11/2024 at 12:28:25

Aman Sharma v. State NCT of Delhi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Aman Sharma v. State NCT of Delhi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ashfaq@Shabbu Vs State Govt of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Nitesh Bhardwaj Vs State of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Kushneet Kumar Vijray Vs State Govt NCT of Delhi

Rachna & Ors. Vs the Commissioner of Police Delhi

Aanchal Aggarwal Vs Commissioner of Police and Others

Mohit Singh and Ors. Vs State and Ors.

Matrix Cellular International Services Limited and Ors. Vs State NCT of Delhi

Ravneet Kour Vs State (Nct of Delhi)

Aman Kapoor Vs State Gnct of Delhi

Kushneet Kumar Vijray Vs State Govt NCT of Delhi

Mujibur Rehman Vs State NCT of Delhi and Anr.

Aman Sharma Vs State NCT of Delhi

Netaji Subhash Institute of Technology Vs M/S Surya Engineers & Another

Maqsood Dabir Shaikh Vs State of NCT of Delhi