1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
AT JODHPUR
O R D E R
S.B.CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.1/2014
Asharam Bapu Vs. State of Rajasthan
Date of order : 24.2.2014
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP MEHTA
Mr. Rajeev Pandey with Mr. Ajay Goswami, for the petitioner.
Mr. Rajesh Panwar, AAG. <><><> The instant writ petition is preferred by the petitioner an undertrial prisoner aged about 75 years lodged at the Central Jail, Jodhpur seeking a direction for being provided food and medical facilities while being incarcerated in the prison. The petitioner filed an application praying the trial court to direct the Jail authorities for being permitted food, cloth, bedding from a private source and treatment by expert Vaidya. The learned trial court vide orders dated 13.9.2013 and 3.12.2013 accepted the prayer made on behalf of the petitioner for being provided treatment by a Vaidya but rejected the prayer of the petitioner for being 2 permitted to be supplied food from outside sources. Feeling dissatisfied with the orders passed by the learned trial court, the instant writ petition has been preferred. Learned counsel for the petitioner referring to Rule 223 of the Rajasthan Prisons Rules, 1951 submits that the rule entitles every undertrial prisoner to purchase or receive from private sources, food, clothing, bedding and other necessaries subject to the restrictions contained in Sub-clauses (a) and (b) thereof. Learned counsel submits that the petitioner being an old ailing man of 75 years, the food being served to him in the prison is not palatable to him and is having an adverse effect on his health. Thus, he be permitted to receive the food from private sources as per Rule 223. Regarding the prayer for treatment, learned counsel concedes that the petitioner is already being provided treatment by competent Vaidyas from the Rajasthan Ayurved University, Jodhpur and on 23.12.2013 the petitioner himself refused to go to the Ayurved University for treatment. Learned counsel submits that if so required, the petitioner be permitted to revive the prayer for treatment by filing an appropriate application before the trial court. Mr. Panwar, learned Addl. Advocate General 3 submits that the petitioner's prayer for treatment has already been accepted by the learned trial court vide order dated 3.12.2013. The petitioner is being provided appropriate treatment by the competent Vaidya of Rajasthan Ayurved University. He, however, does not dispute that Rule 223 of the Rajasthan Prison Rules entitles an undertrial prisoner to purchase or receive from private sources food, clothing and bedding subject to the restrictions contained in (a), (b) and (c) thereof. He, however, submits that if the Court is of the view that the petitioner should be permitted to receive food from private sources a particular person be designated by him who shall supply the food to the petitioner in prison subject to the conditions of the Rule 223 of the Rajasthan Prisons Rules, 1951. So that the safety and security breaches can be avoided. To this learned counsel for the petitioner agrees. Accordingly, the writ petition deserves to be allowed in part. So far as the directions issued by the learned trial court regarding the treatment of the petitioner are concerned, the same do not call for any interference. However, the prayer made by the petitioner for being provided food, clothing and bedding from private sources, there is no impediment in allowing the same in view of Rule 4 223 of the Rules of 1951. Accordingly, it is directed that an affidavit and an undertaking shall be submitted on behalf of the petitioner to the Supdt. Central Jail, Jodhpur within a period of three days mentioning the name of the person who shall supply to the petitioner food, clothing and bedding in terms of Rule 223. The food shall be permitted to be supplied twice a day to the petitioner. Upon the requisite affidavit/undertaking being filed, the petitioner shall be permitted to receive food, bedding and clothing from the private sources subject to scrutiny as per the clauses (a), (b) and (c) of Rule 223 of the Rules of 1951. As the prayer regarding the treatment of petitioner has already been appropriately dealt with by the trial court, no interference is called for so far as this part of the order impugned is concerned. With the above observation, the writ petition is allowed in part. (SANDEEP MEHTA), J. /Sushil/
S.B.CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.1/2014
Asharam Bapu Vs. State of Rajasthan
Date of order : 24.2.2014
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP MEHTA
Mr. Rajeev Pandey with Mr. Ajay Goswami, for the petitioner.
Mr. Rajesh Panwar, AAG. <><><> The instant writ petition is preferred by the petitioner an undertrial prisoner aged about 75 years lodged at the Central Jail, Jodhpur seeking a direction for being provided food and medical facilities while being incarcerated in the prison. The petitioner filed an application praying the trial court to direct the Jail authorities for being permitted food, cloth, bedding from a private source and treatment by expert Vaidya. The learned trial court vide orders dated 13.9.2013 and 3.12.2013 accepted the prayer made on behalf of the petitioner for being provided treatment by a Vaidya but rejected the prayer of the petitioner for being 2 permitted to be supplied food from outside sources. Feeling dissatisfied with the orders passed by the learned trial court, the instant writ petition has been preferred. Learned counsel for the petitioner referring to Rule 223 of the Rajasthan Prisons Rules, 1951 submits that the rule entitles every undertrial prisoner to purchase or receive from private sources, food, clothing, bedding and other necessaries subject to the restrictions contained in Sub-clauses (a) and (b) thereof. Learned counsel submits that the petitioner being an old ailing man of 75 years, the food being served to him in the prison is not palatable to him and is having an adverse effect on his health. Thus, he be permitted to receive the food from private sources as per Rule 223. Regarding the prayer for treatment, learned counsel concedes that the petitioner is already being provided treatment by competent Vaidyas from the Rajasthan Ayurved University, Jodhpur and on 23.12.2013 the petitioner himself refused to go to the Ayurved University for treatment. Learned counsel submits that if so required, the petitioner be permitted to revive the prayer for treatment by filing an appropriate application before the trial court. Mr. Panwar, learned Addl. Advocate General 3 submits that the petitioner's prayer for treatment has already been accepted by the learned trial court vide order dated 3.12.2013. The petitioner is being provided appropriate treatment by the competent Vaidya of Rajasthan Ayurved University. He, however, does not dispute that Rule 223 of the Rajasthan Prison Rules entitles an undertrial prisoner to purchase or receive from private sources food, clothing and bedding subject to the restrictions contained in (a), (b) and (c) thereof. He, however, submits that if the Court is of the view that the petitioner should be permitted to receive food from private sources a particular person be designated by him who shall supply the food to the petitioner in prison subject to the conditions of the Rule 223 of the Rajasthan Prisons Rules, 1951. So that the safety and security breaches can be avoided. To this learned counsel for the petitioner agrees. Accordingly, the writ petition deserves to be allowed in part. So far as the directions issued by the learned trial court regarding the treatment of the petitioner are concerned, the same do not call for any interference. However, the prayer made by the petitioner for being provided food, clothing and bedding from private sources, there is no impediment in allowing the same in view of Rule 4 223 of the Rules of 1951. Accordingly, it is directed that an affidavit and an undertaking shall be submitted on behalf of the petitioner to the Supdt. Central Jail, Jodhpur within a period of three days mentioning the name of the person who shall supply to the petitioner food, clothing and bedding in terms of Rule 223. The food shall be permitted to be supplied twice a day to the petitioner. Upon the requisite affidavit/undertaking being filed, the petitioner shall be permitted to receive food, bedding and clothing from the private sources subject to scrutiny as per the clauses (a), (b) and (c) of Rule 223 of the Rules of 1951. As the prayer regarding the treatment of petitioner has already been appropriately dealt with by the trial court, no interference is called for so far as this part of the order impugned is concerned. With the above observation, the writ petition is allowed in part. (SANDEEP MEHTA), J. /Sushil/
No comments:
Post a Comment