Holding

The Supreme Court directed the preparation of a detailed case record, its dissemination to all High Courts, and the delegation of monitoring and enforcement of its orders to the respective High Courts, with their Legal Aid Committees acting as petitioners.

Summary

The Supreme Court entertained a writ petition filed by Ms. Sheela Barse, later substituted by the Supreme Court Legal Aid Committee, highlighting the deplorable conditions in which mentally ill women and children were detained in jails. The Court appointed Commissioners to investigate and issued several orders to improve conditions. To ensure effective implementation, the Court directed that a comprehensive record of the case be prepared in two parts, with costs borne by the Union of India, and copies be sent to each High Court. Each High Court was instructed to register the matter as a Public Interest Litigation, designate a judge, and empower its Legal Aid Committee to act as petitioner for monitoring compliance. Specific directions were given to the High Court of Assam to ensure state compliance with the Commissioner’s recommendations. The Court concluded that the High Courts are fully competent to pass further orders as necessary, and the matter was closed.

Issues considered

What procedural mechanisms should be employed to monitor the implementation of Supreme Court orders concerning prison conditions for mentally ill women and children?
Can the High Courts be directed to treat the matter as a Public Interest Litigation and assign their Legal Aid Committees as petitioners for monitoring purposes?

Subjects

Public Interest Litigationprison conditionsmentally ill womenchildren detentionimplementation monitoringSupreme Court directionsLegal Aid CommitteeArticle 32

Judgment

A SHEELA BARSE
v.
UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

SEPTEMBER 5, 1995

B (B.P. JEEVAN REDDY AND M.K. MUKHERJEE, JJ.]

Public Interest Litigation-Wlit-Allegi,ng deplorable conditions in jails
detaining insane woman and children-Investigation-Order by Supreme
Cowt-Implementation of-Directions for monitoring of
c
In a writ petition filed by the petitioner, this Court(i) appointed
Commissioners to investigate and report on the deplorable conditions in
which mentally ill and insane women and children were detained in the
jails and (ii) ·passed several orders from time to time. With a view to
monitoring the implementation of its orders this Court gave the following
D directions :

1. The office shall prepare requisite number of sets of the record
of this case in two parts. part-I shall contain the letter written
by the petitioner, the orders passed by this Court from time
E to time and the reports of the Commissioners appointed by
this Court. [352-E-F]

2. The affidavits, counter affidavits, rejoinders, and further af-
fidavits, if any along with their Annexures shall be separated
for each State concerned. Any affidavit!>, reports or other
F documents filed by the Union of India may be included in each
of such sets. This shall be treated as Part-U of the record. The
cost of preparing both Parts-I and II shall be borne by the
Union of India. [352-F-G]

3. A copy ·of the record shall be communicated to each of ·the
G High Courts. Along with Part-I, Part II relating to that par-
ticular State shall also be enclosed. [353-A]

4. The High Courts are requested to register the record so
received by them as a Public Interest Litigation. The Hon'ble
H Chief Justice of each of the High Courts ·is requested to
350
SHEELA BAR.SE v. U.O.I. 351

designate a Judge of that Court to deal with the matter. The A
High Courts shall make all such necessary and appropriate
orders as may be warranted, from time to time, for proper
implementation of the orders of this Court or as may be found
necessary or appropriate to protect and improve the condi-
tions obtaining in places where women and children - not
B
accused or convicted of any crime - are detained. [353-B-C]

5. The High Court Legal Aid Committee of each of the High
Courts shall be treated as the petitioner in the matter in that
High Court. Relevant record shall be communicated to the
respective Legal Aid Board in the High Court. The High Court C
Legal Aid and Advice Board will assist the High Court in the
matter of monitoring compliance with the orders and direc-
tions made by this Court. [353-D-E]

6. The High Court of Assam shall ensure that the State of Assam
complies with the several suggestions made in the report of D
the Commissioner and the order made by this Court on
October, 3, 1994 on the basis of the said report. [353-G]

CRIMINAL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION: Criminal Miscellaneous
Petition No. 505 of 1994.
E
IN

Writ Petition (CRL.) No. 237 of 1989.

(Under Article 32 of the Constitution of India.)
F
Harish N.Salve, S.N. Choudhary, N.N. Goswami, and V.C. Mahajan,
S. Murlidhar, A. Sharan, A. K. Sinha, Ms. Shalini Kumar, Ms. Indu
Malhotra, Ashok Srivastava, T.C. Sharma, Ms. Sushma Suri, Naresh K.
Sharma, Ranbir Yadav, R.S. Suri, P. Parmeshwaran, Krishan Mahajan,
K.V. Venkataraman, N. Sharma, M. Mudgal, D.K. Sinha and J. R. Dass G
for the Appearing parties.

The following Order of the Court was delivered :

A letter from Ms. Sheela Barse addressed to the Hon'ble Chief
Justice of India with respect to the deplorable conditions in which mentally H
352 SUPREME COURT REPORTS (1995] SUPP. 3 S.C.R.

A ill and insane women were locked up and kept in presidency jail, Calcutta,
was registered as a writ petition and certain orders passed. Subsequently,
Ms. Sheela Barse withdrew from the matter. In her place, the Supreme
Court Legal Aid Committee was substituted. Several orders were passed
by this Court from time to time. Commissioners were also appointed to
investigate and report on the conditions obtaining in places where women
B and children were being detained. Over the years, this Court has also been
monitoring the implementation of its orders.

When this matter was placed before us on August 21, 1995, it was
suggested by Sri S. Muralidhar, learned counsel for the petitioner
c (Supreme Court Legal Aid Committee) and also by some of the learned
counsel appearing for the respondents that it would be appropriate if the
function of monitoring the implementation of the several orders passed by
this Court is made over to respective High Courts. It was suggested that
each High Court be requested to monitor and ensure proper and full
implementation of the orders of this Court insofar as that particular State
D is concerned. We found that suggestion acceptable. Sri Muralidhar, learned
counsel for the petitioner and Sri Harish Salve, learned counsel for the
respondents have placed before us their suggestions. The following orders
are made after hearing the learned counsel:

1. The office shall prepare requisite number of sets of the record of
E this case. The record shall be in two parts. Part-I shall contain the letter
written by Ms. Sheela Barse (along with the enclosures thereto), the orders
passed by this Court from time to time arranged in proper sequence and
the reports of the Commissioners appointed by this Court, again in their
proper sequence.
F 2. The office shall separate the affidavits, counter-affidavits,
rejoinders and further affidavits, if any, along with their annexures with
respect to each State separately. If there are any affidavits, reports or other
documents filed by the Union of India, the same may be included in each
of such sets. This Shall be treated as Part-II of the record. Obviously, it
G will be separate for each State concerned herein.

3. The cost of preparing both Parts-I and II shall be borne by the
Union of India. After the record is prepared as directed above, the cost
thereof shall be intimated to the learned counsel for the Union of India in
this case who shall communicate the same to the concerned authority. The
H payment shall be made into the office of this Court within three months
SHEELA BARSE v. U.0.1. 353

therefrom. A
4. The office shall communicate a copy of Part-I to each of the High
.. Courts. Along with Part-I, Part-II relating to that particular State shall also
be enclosed.

5. The High Courts are requested to register the record so received B
by them as a Public Interest Litigation. The Hon'ble Chief Justice of each
of the High Courts is requested to designate a Judge of that Court to deal
with the matter. The High Court shall made all such necessary and ap-
propriate orders as may be warranted, from time to time, for a proper
implementation of the orders of this Court. The High Court shall also be
free to pass such other and further orders as may be found necessary or C
appropriate to protect and improve the conditions obtaining in places
• where women and children - not accused or convicted of any crime - are
detained.

6. The High Court Legal Aid Committee of each of the High Courts
shall be treated as the petitioner in the matter in that High Court. Copies D
of Part-I ( and Part-II, wherever applicable) shall be communicated to the
respective Legal Aid Board in the High Court.

The High Court Legal Aid and Advice Board will assist the High
Court in the matter of monitoring compliance with the orders and direc- E
tions made by this Court. It will be entitled to apply for such further orders
and directions from the High Court as may be found necessary in the
matters.

7. It is made clear that the High Courts to whom the proceedings are
being made over shall be fully free and competent to pass such further and F
make such further directions as they think appropriate in the light of the
facts and circumstances obtaining in that particular State consistent with
and to further the objectives underlying the orders of this Court.

8. So far as the State of Assam is concerned, the High Court shall
ensure that the State of Assam complies with the several suggestions made G
in the report of the Commissioner, Sri Gopal Subramaniam, and the order
made by this Court on October 3, 1994 on the basis of the said report.

With the above directions, the matter is closed.

T.N.A. Disposed of.