Unfortunate That Officers Have Shifted Entire Blame On Standing Counsel: SC Directs UP Chief Secretary To Inquire Into Delay In Considering Remission Application
|The Supreme Court has directed the Chief Secretary of the State of Uttar Pradesh to inquire and file a personal affidavit into the matter where an application filed for permanent remission by a convict was kept pending even after the Court’s directions.
The Bench of Justice Abhay S Oka and Justice Augustine George Masih said, “Therefore, it is very unfortunate that the officers of the State Government have now shifted the entire blame on the Advocate-on-Record/Standing Counsel who represented the State of Uttar Pradesh in this Court. The matter does not rest here. As the Jail Superintendent was aware that the case was fixed for 15th July, 2024, obviously, he must be aware of the orders passed on 13th May, 2024 and 15th July, 2024. If the case of the Jail Superintendent was that he did not receive the order dated 13th May, 2024 till 25th May, 2024, that would have been the first averment in the application dated 13th July, 2024… We direct the Chief Secretary of the State of Uttar Pradesh to inquire into the entire episode and file his personal affidavit explaining the conduct of the State Government and its officers.”
AOR CK Rai appeared for the Petitioner whereas ASG KM Natraj appeared for the Respondents.
The Court had, on the previous date of hearing, asked the State Government to consider the case for the remission of the Petitioner, and for that, the Court, on August 5, 2024, sought a response and personal appearance of the Principal Secretary, Prison Administration Department. The Court had ordered that the Code of Conduct would not come in the way of the State Government while considering the case of the petitioner for the grant of permanent remission. On August 12, 2024, the Principal Secretary of the Prison Administration Department appeared through video conference but had hardly any explanation to offer for the long delay in compliance with the orders of the Court and gave an excuse that the file was pending with the competent Authority.
After that, on the next date of the hearing, the Principal Secretary filed another affidavit, which was completely different from the statements made by the officer on August 12. The Court had ordered, “The affidavit gives an impression that from the Hon'ble Minister of the concerned Department, the file was sent to the Hon'ble Governor's office. However, it is not mentioned in the affidavit that the file was sent to the office of the Hon'ble Chief Minister on 5th August, 2024. It appears that the file was signed by the Hon'ble Chief Minister on 5th August, 2024 and on 13th August, 2024 the file was signed by the Hon'ble Governor. Thus, a complete breach of the order dated 13th May, 2024 is writ large on the file. In fact, the statement which was orally made by the Principal Secretary on the last date that the file was kept pending because of the Code of Conduct appears to be fully correct as can be seen from the file.”
Pursuant to this order, the Principal Secretary filed the affidavits. The Court said, “Prima facie, it appears to us that the stand taken by Shri Rajesh Kumar Singh, Principal Secretary, in the affidavits is completely contrary to the statements made by him while he appeared through video conference on 12th August, 2024. The statements made by him have been recorded in the said order dated 12th August, 2024. Therefore, prima facie, it appears to us that this Officer has filed false affidavits. Therefore, we issue notice to him calling upon him to show cause why action for criminal contempt should not be initiated against him and why action should not be initiated against him for perjury. The notice is made returnable on 27th September, 2024.”
The Court said that on April 1, 2024, it had directed the State of Uttar Pradesh to consider the case of the petitioner for the grant of permanent remission in accordance with the applicable policy and pass an appropriate order on or before May 10, 2024. On May 13, 2024, the Court clarified that the Code of Conduct on account of the elections of Lok Sabha will not come in the way of the Authorities considering the prayer for grant of permanent remission made by the petitioner. Though there was no application made by the State Government, on 13th May 2024, the Court extended the time till July 15, 2024, to decide the prayer for grant of permanent remission.
The Court said that the stand of the Principal Secretary had undergone a drastic change. It was stated in the Affidavit that the order dated May 13, 2024, was not officially communicated to the deponent (Rajesh Kumar Singh, Principal Secretary) by the Standing Counsel and that the said order was communicated to the Office of the Principal Secretary on May 25, 2024, through e- mail. It was further stated in the Affidavit that a note of the same was taken by the concerned Section Officer on June 6, 2024. The same stand was reiterated in the affidavit dated August 25, 2024.
“The entire blame is now sought to be shifted on the Advocate-on-Record/Standing Counsel representing the State of Uttar Pradesh by stating that the order dated 13th May, 2024 was not communicated till 25th May, 2024. As stated earlier, in the application for extension of time dated 13th July, 2024 filed on behalf of the State of Uttar Pradesh, there is not even a word that the order dated 13th May, 2024 was not communicated till 25th May, 2024 and that the Section Officer took note of the said order for the first time on 6th June, 2024. Therefore, what is stated by the State Government in both the affidavits is clearly an afterthought… it was the duty of the concerned officer of the State Government to ascertain from the Advocate-on-Record/Standing Counsel for the State of Uttar Pradesh as to what transpired on 13th May, 2024.”, the Court said.
It also added that prima facie, the case that was made out that the Jail Officers were not aware of the order dated May 13, 2024, till May 25, 2024, was completely false.
“The affidavits dated 14th August, 2024 and 25th August, 2024 lay credence to the fact that indeed the file was kept pending till the Code of Conduct was over.”, the Court said.
In another similar case, the Court had summoned the Secretary of the Home Department of the State of Uttar Pradesh to appear before the court to explain its conduct in not complying with the previous order directing to consider permanent remission of a convict.
Accordingly, the Court directed the Chief Secretary of the State of Uttar Pradesh to file an affidavit in this regard by September 24, 2024 and listed the matter on September 29, 2024.
Cause Title: Ashok Kumar v. The State Of Uttar Pradesh & Anr.
Appearances:
Petitioner: AOR CK Rai, Advocates Arvind Kumar Tiwari, Anuradha Roy and Vinay Kumar Gupta
Respondents: ASG KM Natraj, AAG Garima Prashad, AOR Sakshi Thakur, Advocates Sharan Thakur, Sidharth Thakur and Varsal Joshi.