Name of State

Number of COVID-19 positive cases in prisons

COVID related deaths

Inmates

Prison Staff

Inmates

Prison Staff

Andhra Pradesh

490

150

Assam

223

Bihar

86

Chhattisgarh

91

9

Delhi

382

221

8

Goa

32

34

Gujarat

32

5

2

Haryana

450+98

Jammu and Kashmir

150

16

Jharkhand

264

17

2

Karnataka

240

Kerala

319

Madhya Pradesh

667

Maharashtra*

4233

715

13

9

Mizoram

160

Odisha

309

1

Punjab

1,086

17

Rajasthan

600

Tamil Nadu

100

182

2

6

Telangana

25

Tripura

1

Uttarakhand

59

Uttar Pradesh*

18, 508

9691

25

West Bengal

4

Chandigarh

56

Puducherry

41

3

Total

5,960

646

28

6

Name of the State

Total number of Prisons

Sanctioned Prison Capacity

Actual Prison Population

Occupancy Rate

Categories of prisoners identified for release by the HPCs in the second wave

Number of prisoners released

Andhra Pradesh

79

8,732

6,905
(as on 8th May 2021)

79%

The court's order dated 30th May, 2021, directed that: the undertrial prisoners and convicts booked for offences punishable with not more than 7 years to be released on interim bail for a period of 90 days. Such people to remain in home isolation under the surveillance of either a doctor or the police. Prisoners booked for a second time, and for committing offences under section 376 I.P.C, 395 I.P.C, 397 I.P.C, and the POCSO Act to be left out of the ambit of this direction of release.

171

Assam

31

8938

9885

(as on 15^th June 2021)

110%

801

Bihar

59

46,669

57,247

(as on 7^th June 2021)

133%

-Punishment of not more than 7 years, those eligible for release under 436A CrPC,
-Punishment of 7 years or less and the case is exclusively triable by magistrate,
-Punishment of not more than 7 years and granted bail but not released due to the inability of furnishing bond,
-Detained under sections 107, 108, 109, and 151 CrPC,
-Only one under trial case is pending with maximum punishment of 7 years, even if bail granted in another pending cases but being held for one case with maximum punishment of 7 years,
-Two undertrial cases pending where maximum punishment is 7 years, in judicial custody and awaiting police report where punishment for the offence is not more than 7 years, first time offenders facing trial where punishment is not more than 7 years and have been in custody for 3 months or so,
-Imprisoned due to dishonour of order under section 125 CrPC or other matrimonial proceedings
-Those facing a punishment of 10 years who have severe health issues with comorbidities such as diabetes, HIV, severe asthma, severe lung disease, serious hearth condition, kidney dysfunction requiring dialysis, Hepatitis B and C, Pregnancy,
-Inmates above 60 years of age,
-Inmates above 60 years facing trial for an offence punishable with 10 months and have been in custody for 6 months,
-Facing trial only in cases concerning 307 and 308 IPC and in jail for 6 months with no other cases,
-In jail for theft cases and retained for 15 days,
-Male prisoners above 65 years of age and female prisoners above 60 years of age except the excluded list of offences with no involvement in other cases,
-Mother-in-law, father-in-law, sister-in-law, brother-in-law of the deceased in matter pertaining to 498A IPC with no other cases pending. and in custody for 2 years

16,864
(June 2021)

Chhattisgarh

33

12,063

18112

(as on 31st December 2019 as per PSI 2019 data)

150%

3166

(as on 6^th June 2021)

Delhi

10

10,000

20,000

(as on 15^th May 2021)

200%

1. Inmates undergoing Civil Imprisonment;
2. Under trial prisoners (UTPs) who are facing trial in a case
which prescribes a maximum sentence of 7 years or less
wherein he/she is in custody for a period of 15 days or more;
3. Under trial prisoners (UTPs)/Remand Prisoners (with
respect to whom, Charge sheets are yet to be filed), who are
in custody for 15 days or more, facing trial in a case which
prescribes a maximum sentence of 7 years or less ;
4. Under trial prisoners (UTPs), who are senior citizens more
than 60 years of age and are in custody for three months or
more, facing trial in a case which prescribes a maximum
sentence of 10 years or less;
5. Under trial prisoners (UTPs), who are less than 60 years of
age and are in custody for six months or more, facing trial in
a case which prescribes a maximum sentence of 10 years or
less; subject to the condition that he should not be involved in any
other case which prescribes punishment of more than 7 years;
6. Under trial prisoners (UTPs), who are suffering from HIV,
Cancer, Chronic Kidney Dysfunction(UTPs requiring
Dialysis), Hepatitis B or C, Asthma, and TB and are in
custody, facing trial in a case which prescribes a maximum
sentence of 10 years or less and are not involved in multiple
cases;
7. Under trial prisoners (UTPs) who are suffering from HIV,
Cancer, Chronic Kidney Dysfunction (UTPs requiring
Dialysis), Hepatitis B or C, Asthma, and TB and are in
custody for a period of three months or more and facing trial
in a case which prescribes punishment of 10 years upto life
imprisonment and are not involved in multiple cases.
8. Under trial prisoners (UTPs) facing trial for offence under
Section 304 IPC and are in jail for more than six months with
no involvement in any other case;
9. Under trial prisoners (UTPs) facing trial in a case under Section
307 IPC and are in jail for more than six months; subject to the
condition that he should not be involved in any other case which
prescribes punishment of more than 7 years;
10. Under trial prisoners (UTPs) (who are related as spouse of the
deceased) facing trial for a case under 304B IPC and are in jail
for more than one year with no involvement in any other
case;
11. Under trial prisoners (UTPs) (who are related as father-in-law,
mother-in-law, brothers-in-law, sisters-in-law of the deceased)
facing trial for offence under Section 304B IPC and are in jail
for more than six years with no involvement in any other
case;
12. Under trial prisoners (UTPs) facing trial for a case under
Section 302 IPC and are in jail for more than two years
with no involvement in any other case;

2800
(as on 4th June 2021)

Goa

Colvale prison data

625

458

(as on 16^th July 2021)

73%

-Those prisoners who were released in 2020 with sentence of 7 years or less and 13 additional prisoners who are eligible for current pandemic to be released on parole for a period of 30 days. -40 prisoners undergoing life sentence and 16 prisoners undergoing a sentence of seven years and above to be released on parole on a case to case basis.

95

(as on 16^th July 2021)

Gujarat

27

13,762

15,089
(as on 31st December 2019 as per PSI 2019 data)

109%

- Inmates undergoing trial for an offence punishable up to 7 years or less and the case is exclusively triable by judicial magistrate.
- Inmates in the above mentioned category who have been granted bail by the competent court but have not been released yet as they were unable to furnish bond.
-Inmate detained under chapter VIII CrPC (sections 107, 108, 109, 151)
-An inmate of unsound mind facing trial for an offence punishable up to 7 years or less and needs to be dealt with under chapter XXV of CrPC -jail inmates who failed to honour maintenance orders under section 125 CrPC.
-Inmates jailed for civil contempt
-An inmate convicted by CJM or JM for an imprisonment of less than 7 years
-Inmate convicted by sessions court and imprisoned for less than seven years

1534
(as on 31st May, 2021)

Himachal Pradesh

14

2,417

2,494
(as on 17th June 2021)

103%

-Convicts out on parole at present to be granted a further extension of 90 days,
-Convicts and undertrial prisoners who were granted a bail on 27th March 2021 and who have surrendered to be granted bail,
-Foreign nationals left out of the ambit

245
(prisoners released between Jan-April 2021)

Jharkhand

30

17,096

22,357
 

130%

-Prisoners with no or less criminal antecedence,
-Prisoners facing punishment of less than seven years, not involved in heinous offences or economic offences or Naxal activities

1289

(as on 4^th July 2021)

Karnataka

102

14,314

14,515

(as on 31st December 2019 as per PSI 2019 data)

101%

-UTP detained under sections 107, 108, 109 and 151 IPC.
-UTP facing a trial for an offence punishable upto 7 years or of unsound mind to be dealt with provision of chapter 25 CrPC,
-Inmates undergoing punishment for dishonouring order under section 125CrPC and other matrimonial proceedings,
-Inmates punished for civil contempt

1120
(as on 21st June 2021)

Madhya Pradesh

123

29,525
(as on 4th June 2021)

43,366

146%

-Under trial prisoners who are facing trials exclusively triable by the court of Magistrate to be considered by the concerned courts on case to case basis.
-All such convicts be granted parole who have either served of 1/3rd of the sentence awarded to them or if sentenced to life imprisonment have completed sentence of 7 years or more.

11,711

Maharashtra

150

23,217

33,832

145%

-Prisoners who fall in the category
as determined by the HPC
-Prisoners who are 65 years of
age and above and having co-morbidities [as spelt
out by Indian Council for Medical Research (ICMR)],

12, 081

(as on 6^th June 2021)

Nagaland

11

1450

455

(as on 12^th May 2021)

31%

11

Odisha

91

19,824
(as on 31st may 2021)

19,693

99%

Criteria for UTPs to be decided by the UTRC

436

Tamil Nadu

142

23,592

14,321

(as on 15^th June 2021)

60%

25,148

Telangana

46

7869

(as on 11th May, 2021)

6775

(as on 11th May, 2021)

86%

As mentioned in point 14 on page 22 of the pdf, Telangana prisons are not facing overcrowding at the moment.

Uttar Pradesh

67

60,340

1,10384
(as on May 2021)

183%

16,054

(as on June 2021)

State

Date of the meeting

Websites on which the minutes are uploaded

Andhra Pradesh

12th May 2021

27th May 2021

15^th June 2021

Andhra Pradesh High Court

Andhra Pradesh State Legal Services Authority (SLSA)

Arunachal Pradesh

18^th June 2021

Website of the Gauhati High Court, Itanagar Permanent Bench

Assam

12th May 2021

16th May 2021

17th May 2021

21st May 2021

Assam SLSA

Bihar

28^th May 2021
4th June 2021

Patna High Court

Bihar SLSA

Chhattisgarh

12th May 2021

Chhattisgarh SLSA

Delhi

11th May 2021

Delhi High Court Legal Services Committee
Delhi High Court

Goa

10th May 2021
24th May 2021

11^th June 2021

Goa SLSA

Gujarat

12th May 2021

Gujarat SLSA

Haryana

11th May 2021

Haryana SLSA

Himachal Pradesh

13th May 2021

High Court Website

Himachal Pradesh SLSA

Jammu & Kashmir

17th May 2021
27th May 2021

J&K SLSA

Jharkhand

17th May 2021

6^th July 2021

Jharkhand SLSA

Karnataka

29th April 2021
10th May 2021
11th May 2021
18th May 2021

Karnataka SLSA

Kerala

9^th May 2021

Kerala SLSA

Madhya Pradesh

12th May 2021
22nd May 2021
4th June 2021

MP Prisons Website

MP SLSA

Maharashtra

11th May 2021

Maharashtra SLSA

Manipur

26th April 2021
24th May 2021

Manipur SLSA

Mizoram

20th May 2021

Mizoram SLSA

Nagaland

13th May 2021

Nagaland SLSA

Odisha

8th May 2021
15th May, 2021
21st May, 2021
28th May, 2021
4th June 2021
11th June 2021

18th June 2021
21st June 2021

2^nd July 2021

9^th July 2021

Odisha SLSA

Punjab

10th May 2021

Punjab SLSA

Rajasthan

13th May 2021

Rajasthan SLSA

Tamil Nadu

19th May 2021

15^th June 2021

 Tamil Nadu SLSA

Telangana

19th May 2021

Telangana SLSA

Tripura

15th May 2021

Tripura SLSA

Uttar Pradesh

10th May 2021

21st May 2021

UP SLSA

Uttarakhand

9th May 2021
17th May, 2021

23^rd June 2021

Uttarakhand SLSA

West Bengal

11^th May 2021

West Bengal SLSA

Chandigarh

9th May 2021

Chandigarh SLSA

S.No.

Name of the High Court

Case Title

Summary the High Court Orders

1

Allahabad High Court

In Re
Respondent: State of U.P.
 

(6 April,2020) To meet the eventualities that occurred as a consequence of the lockdown imposed to arrest the spread of coronavirus, the court ordered that all accused-applicants whose bail application were allowed on or after 15 March, 2020 but had not been released due to non-availability of sureties amid the lockdown, may be released on execution of personal bonds provided the accused-applicants undertake to furnish the required sureties within a period of one month from the date of his/her actual release.

PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION (PIL) No. - 564 of 2020

24th April 2021: All Courts in the state of UP over which the HC has power of superintendence that was subsisting on 15th March 2021 shall extend to 31st May, 2021. Criminal courts that granted bail orders to accused that were to expire before 31st May 2021 are to now expire on 31st May 2021.

2

Andhra Pradesh High Court

1.In re, contagion of covid virus in prisons in the State of Andhra Pradesh














 

1. 26 March, 2020:The court ordered that in criminal matters where bail/suspension had been granted by the court either anticipatory or regular for a limited period, which are likely to expire within one month from the day, were to be automatically extended for a further period of one month.
As per the resolution of the HPC, the court also directed that the convicts or undertrial offenders for the offences to which maximum sentence prescribed is not more than seven years, may be released on interim bail on furnishing adequate bail bonds if they are not second offenders and also not offenders under Section 376 of IPC and POCSO Act, for a period of one month.
For the purpose of bail bond, the Principal District and Sessions Judge was to assign the Judicial Magistrate to reach the district jails on being asked by the Superintendent of the Central Jail of the area, for furnishing/accepting adequate bail bonds to the satisfaction of the magistrate, for their release to a limited period. They were also to give an undertaking that they would quarantine for 14 days at their home under the surveillance of the doctor with the help of the Police.

Subsequently, in the order dated 30th May 2021, the court's order directed that: the undertrial prisoners and convicts booked for offences punishable with not more than 7 years to be released on interim bail for a period of 90 days. Such people to remain in home isolation under the surveillance of either a doctor or the police. Transportation arrangements to be made by the Principal Secretary, Home and Director General of Prisons to arrange for the transportation of prisoners to their homes. Prisoners booked for a second time, and for committing offences under section 376 I.P.C, 395 I.P.C, 397 I.P.C, and the POCSO Act to be left out of the ambit of this direction of release. Covid protocol to be maintained in juvenile remand homes as well. Director General of Prisons to share data on prison capacity and occupancy in jails with APSLSA and to be uploaded on websites of APSLSA, Jail Department, and High Court of Andhra Pradesh.

2. In re: extension of interim orders in view of current covid 19 Pandemic

2. All the interim orders passed by courts/ tribunals subordinate to the HC as subsisting on 21st April, 2021 shall now extend till 30th June 2021.

3

Bombay High Court

1. High Court on its own Motion v. State of Maharashtra






 

1. 23 April, 2020: The Bombay High Court directed the HPC to decide whether the distinction made between prisoners/undertrials accused under IPC and those under special enactments like MPID, MCOCA, NDPS, PMLA, UAPA etc for release on parole due to the pandemic of Covid-19, is discriminatory.
In its judgement of 5-8-2020, the court refused to quash the HPC decision and upheld the classifications as non-discriminatory.
29th April 2021: The court order of 29th April, 2021, directed the High Power Committees to conduct meetings on a regular basis. Directed the regulation of prison staffers by having them visit in batches and work for a longer duration at a time to curb the speed of infections. Masks and sanitizers to be distributed to the prisoners on a regular basis. Directed prison authorities to not force an inmate to opt for interim bail/ emergency parole without consent. Directed the Government to formulate a policy for vaccination of those prisoners who do not have Aadhar Card and other identity cards. Directed setting up of temporary prisons. Directed the State to comply with the Maharashtra Prison (Prison Hospital) Rules, 2015 and address the problem of shortage of medical staff in prisons, if any. Directed the Undertrial Review Committee to formulate a plan of action based on the NALSA SoP

2.Faruk Khan and ors. V. State of Maharashtra and ors.

2. 14 September, 2020:The Bombay High Court held that those prisoners or undertrials who have already been granted emergency parole as per notification dated May 8 for decongestion of prisons in view of the coronavirus, need not apply for extension of parole  once the initial 45 day period is over.

3.People’s Union Civil Liberties and ors. V. State of Maharashtra and ors.

3. 12 June, 2020
The court sought details of pending bail applications of inmates from trial courts.
It also asked the ADG, Prisons to furnish the information on the protocol being followed in correctional homes for testing of inmates who are asymptomatic and in direct and high risk contact of inmates who have tested positive for COVID-19, and whether inmates have passed away after testing positive for COVID-19.

4

Calcutta High Court

1. In Re: Overcrowding in Prison

 

1. (24 March, 2020)
The court directed that the release of eligible inmates was to be decided on case to case basis by the committee, which was to be constituted by the state government with due involvement of the Legal Services Authority.
The HPC was to consider all precautionary measures within the correctional homes apart from taking adequate steps to enable release of eligible convicts and undertrial inmates.

 

2. The Hon’ble Court’s in its Own Motion v. State of West Bengal

2. (31 March, 2020) The High Court asked for the compliance of the recommendations that the HPC came up with to reduce overcrowding in prisons after its first meeting on 27 March, 2020.

5

Chhattisgarh High Court

Suo Moto v. State of Chhattisgarh and Ors.

(30 March 2020)
The High Court extended the time period of all bail orders passed by it and by the courts subordinate to it, which have expired or will expire on or after March 16, till May 15, 2020.
It also directed the SLSA to ensure forthwith the release of prisoners as identified by the state HPC to be eligible for release on interim bail, as a measure to de-congest prisons, in compliance with the Supreme Court's order.
 

6

Delhi High Court

1. Natasha Narwal v. State of NCT Delhi




 

1. 5th May 2021: In the order dated 5th May, 2021 the court ordered that, tele-calling by prisoners be extended to pre-paid numbers as long as the number is verified and belongs to a relative of the prisoner. Covid positive inmates to be given the facility of calling family every day for five minutes to update them of their health. Counselling to be given to prisoners on benefits of vaccination. Prison ID to be used in place of Aadhar and Pan Card for registration on portal. Where an inmate doesn't have their own mobile number, they are permitted to use the number of their close relatives for the purpose of registration. Vaccines for the age group 18-44, about 279 inmates, to be procured by jail superintendent within 15-30 days. Duration of E-mulaqaats to be extended from 15 minutes to 30 minutes on a weekly basis.

2. Shubha Gupta v& Ors. v. Union of India & Ors.

2.(23 March, 2020)
The court directed the Delhi government and Delhi Police to take immediate steps to implement its decision to:
a. Introduce 60 days parole in one spell.
b. Introduce a temporary facility of ‘special furlough’ due to the threat of epidemic, natural disaster, etc. which warrants an easing of inmate population in the interest of inmates and society at large

c. Introduce “emergency parole” (parole for up to eight weeks in one spell).
d. In case of undertrial prisoners who are booked only in one case in which the maximum sentence is seven years or less and have completed a minimum of three months in jail, they were to be granted interim bail for 45 days on request (preferably on a personal bond).
e. Undertrial prisoners were at liberty to apply for interim bails.
 

3. The Court on its own motion v. state of Delhi

3. 9 April, 2020: The High Court ordered that all bail orders, passed by the court or by the court’s subordinate to it, on or before 7 April, 2020, in pursuance whereto the undertrial prisons had not been released on bail owing to failure to satisfy the condition of furnishing surety bond, were to be modified to be read as granting bail without the condition of furnishing surety bond and instead allowing such undertrial prisoners to be released on furnishing personal bond to the satisfaction of Superintendent of Jail.

4. Virender vs State (Gnct) Of Delhi)

4. (6 July 2021)
“It is thus evident that the Govt. of NCT of Delhi vide order dated 27th March, 2020, considering the emergent situation caused due to Covid-19 and in exercise of the powers conferred under Rule 1212A of the Delhi Prison Rules decided to release certain categories of prisoners on emergency parole and that the period of emergency parole shall be counted towards the sentence of the prisoners. This period of emergency parole was extended from time to time and the order granting extensions, noted that the period of emergency parole shall be counted towards the sentence of the prisoners."

7

Gujarat High Court

Suo Motu v. State of Gujarat and 2 others

(27 March, 2020)
The Gujarat High Court extended all bail orders, regulatory or anticipatory, that were due to expire before April 30, by a month.
The court, while stating that a blanket order restraining arrests could not be passed, directed the Department of Home, Government of Gujarat to ensure that before any accused is arrested and sent to jail, it is confirmed that he/she is not suspected to be or infected with Coronavirus.

8

Guwahati High Court

1. Lawyers Association, Guwahati v. State of Assam

1.The court in its order of 7th May, directed that people working at Juvenile Justice Homes and Child Care Centres to be treated as frontline workers for the purpose of vaccination

2. In Re State of Assam & two Ors.

2. List of female prisoners lodged with children under the age of six to be forwarded by the State Government to the HPC for consideration of release

3. Guwahati v. The State of Assam and ors. PIL(Suo Moto) 4/2020

3. 23 July, 2020: The Gauhati High Court registered a suo motu Public Interest Litigation (PIL) regarding the rising cases of COVID-19 in Assam prisons. The court sought information regarding the number of COVID-19 positive cases, the precautionary steps that were taken, the process of disinfecting the prisons and the treatment being provided to jail inmates. It directed that the best of the measures available with the state of Assam be employed to give qualitative treatment to the jail inmates across the state so that no further damage is caused. The court also directed that the persons who had not tested positive for Covid-19 be segregated and be maintained as such so that the disease is not transmitted to them. And that, all the jail inmates in Assam be tested for COVID-19.

9

Karnataka High Court

Amole Kale V. state of Karnataka 8908/2020

(3 September, 2020)
The Karnataka High Court directed the state government to furnish details of facilities available inside prisons for treating COVID-19 patients and the number of inmates so far infected
12 October 2020: Karnataka High Court directed the Government to furnish details of overcrowding in prisons across state and provide steps taken for decongestion 13th November 2020: KSLSA directed to place on record any copies of report on prison conditions submitted by CHRI. 24th November 2021: Registry to prepare copies of the letter dated 23rd November 2020 and annexures thereto as well as two volumes of Karnataka Prison Study Report. A set each be supplied to the learned Additional Government Advocate as well as the learned counsel for the petitioner to enable the learned counsel to go through the report.

10

Madhya Pradesh High Court

1.(IN REFERENCE (SUO MOTU) Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH & OTHERS)












 

1. In the 10th May 2021 order, the Court gave the following directions:
-Criteria for releasing Convicts: An emergency parole of at least 90 days to males who are above 60 years, females who are either above 45 years, or pregnant, or lodged in jail with their minor children, prisoners suffering from health issues such as cancer, hearing ailment, tuberculosis, hepatitis A & B, HIV, Asthma, kidney dysfunction, have under gone bypass surgery, or suffer from more than 40% disability.
-Criteria For releasing undertrials: Bail application of those undertrial prisoners who have booked for offences punishable with not more than 7 years with or without fine to be decided by concerned District and Sessions judge within 4 days upon production of bail bond and surety. Same to be done with the undertrials covered by the 2018 NALSA SoP. Undertrials who have committed an offence during the interim bail and those who were granted interim bail but failed to surrender in terms of bail order not to be released. Before releasing both undertrials and convicts, if anyone is found to be either covid positive or suffering from any other illness, authorities are to provide them treatment at the nearest Government hospital.
-Measures to be taken for inmates: RT-PCR to be conducted on a fortnightly basis. New inmates to be tested before entering jail premises and kept in isolation till they test negative. RT-PCR to be conducted in Children's Home and rehabilitation centres as well. State Government to waiver off fine where prisoner is unable to pay fine amount and release at the earliest. Data on undertrial prisoners whose case is exclusively triable by Court of Magistrate to be presented by Jail authorities before HPCs. Inmates to be divided in age groups of 18-45 & 45 and above for vaccination purpose by jail authorities who are also to place on record action plan for vaccination.

2. Lal Singh Adiwasi v. State of Madhya Pradesh

2.(13th July 2021)
“Injuries received by the injured are simple in nature and not dangerous to life. There are no chances of escalation of the offence to the higher count. Co-accused Gopal Adiwasi has already been enlarged on bail by this Court vide order dated dt.28.06.2021 passed in M.Cr.C.No.31356/2021. The case of the present applicant is identical to that of the co-accused Gopal Adiwasi. Disposal of the matter will take long time. It is further submitted that trial is held up due to COVID-19 and the applicant cannot be kept in custody for an unlimited period without any substantial reason. It is further submitted that in view of outbreak of COVID-19, detention of the applicant in already congested prison may be detrimental. The applicant is a permanent resident of District Ashoknagar (M.P.) and there is no possibility of his absconsion or tampering with the prosecution evidence. The applicant is ready to abide by all the terms and conditions as may be imposed by this Court. Under these grounds, HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH, BENCH AT GWALIOR M.Cr.C. No.32963/2021 ( Lal Singh Adiwasi Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh ) applicant prays for grant of bail.”

3. Vishnu Sharma vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh

3.(13th July 2021)
"Accordingly, it is directed that before releasing the applicant, the jail authorities shall get the applicant examined by a competent Doctor and if the Doctor is of the opinion that his Corona Virus test is necessary, then the same shall be conducted. If the applicant is not found suspected of Covid19 infection or if his test report is negative, then the concerned local administration shall make necessary arrangements for sending the applicant to his house as per the directions issued by the Supreme Court in the case of IN RE : CONTAGION OF COVID 19 VIRUS IN PRISONS (Supra) , and if he is found positive then the applicant shall be immediately sent to concerning hospital for his treatment as per medical norms. The applicant is further directed to strictly follow all the instructions which may be issued by the Central Govt./State Govt. or Local Administration for combating Covid19. If it is found that the applicant has violated any of the instructions (whether general or specific) issued by the Central Govt./State Govt. or Local Administration, then this order shall automatically lose its effect, and the Local Administration/Police Authorities shall immediately take him in custody and would send him to the same jail from where he was released. The applicant is further directed to supply a copy of this bail order to the police station having jurisdiction over his place of residence."
"In re with CONTAGION OF COVID 19 VIRUS IN PRISONS by order dated 7-4-2020 has directed as under:
“In these circumstances, we consider it appropriate to direct that Union of India shall ensure that all the prisoners having been released by the States/Union Territories are not left stranded and they are provided transportation to reach their homes or given the option to stay in temporary shelter homes for the period of lockdown. For this purpose, the Union of India may issue appropriate directions under the Disaster Management Act, 2005 or any other law for the time being in force. We further direct that the States/Union Territories shall ensure through Directors General of Police to provide safe transit to the prisoners who have been released so that they may reach their homes. They shall also be given an option for staying in temporary shelter homes during the period of lockdown.”

4. Manmeet Singh vs The State Of M.P.

4.(6 July 2021)
“Today, the applicant seeks bail mainly on the ground of directions given by the Division Bench of this High Court to the context of releasing of under trial prisoners under unprecedented situation of COVID-19 pandemic and long incarceration period of the applicant. The Division Bench has suggested the release of under trial prisoners on temporary bail who are facing trial for the offences for which the maximum punishment prescribed is 7 years and who are covered by the SOP issued by the NLSA in December, 2018.”

5. Madhuri Krishnaswami v. State of Madhya Pradesh &Ors.
Writ Petition No. 8391 of 2020

5.(29 June, 2020)
The Madhya Pradesh High Court issued notice on a petition alleging non-implementation of the Supreme Court order for decongestion of prisons in the state. The court issued a notice to the MP Government, its Law and Legal Affairs Department, its Health Department, the Director General of Prisons, State Legal Services Authority and the Director General of Police.

Subsequently on 17th May 2021 the Court instructed the DG Police to ensure strict compliance of all police stations with Arnesh Kumar guidelines. Judicial magistrates to ensure compliance with section 41 and section 41A CrPC. If not adhered to, the accused shall not stay detained. Registrar General of HC to circulate copies of Arnesh Kumar guidelines amongst district judges to be served upon judicial magistrates. Director of the State Judicial Academy to organize online/virtual programme, in a cluster of districts or division-wise, in batches, for sensitizing, not only the Judicial Magistrates but also the police officers, in tandem with the M.P. Police Academy. The Director of the M.P. Police Academy shall in this connection coordinate with the Director of State Judicial Academy to work out the modalities for sensitizing the police officers of the State. The DG Police shall also be responsible for compliance of this direction. We direct the Member Secretary of the M.P. State Legal Services Authority, Jabalpur to require the Member Secretaries of the respective District Legal Services Authorities to move an appropriate application through their Legal Aid Counsels before the respective Juvenile Justice Boards on behalf of the children in conflict with law, for their release from Observation Homes across the State, who shall consider the application and decide the same within a period of three days from the date of its filing in the light of the observations made by the Supreme Court in the aforesaid order dated 03.04.2020 passed in Suo Motu Writ Petition (Civil) No.4 of 2020.

11

Madras High Court

V. Krishnamurthy v. The State of Tamil Nadu and ors.

(3 April, 2020)
The Madras High Court issued notices on a writ petition seeking immediate constitution of an HPC, to determine the class of prisoners that can be released on interim bail, amid the COVID-19 pandemic

12

Orissa High Court

Krushna Prasad Sahoo v. State of Orissa &Ors.

Order of the court dated, 28th April, 2021 directed that the absence of Aadhar card and other identity cards required for registration on COWIN portal not to be a ground for denying vaccination to any prisoner. State Government to come up with an alternate arrangement to include all prisoners not having Aadhar.

Another order dated 31st May, 2021 directed the State Government to formulate an action plan for dealing with the problem of overcrowding in prisons amidst covid. As a way of decongesting prisons, state building facilities to be upgraded to house prisoners.

13

Punjab & Haryana High Court

1.Ishu Grover @Ishu @Golu v. U.T., Chandigarh and another

1.(30 March, 2020)
The court directed all the subordinate courts in Punjab, Haryana and Chandigarh to release the accused who had already been granted bail on furnishing their personal bonds without enforcing the condition of surety bonds/bail bonds (while laying down the condition that when situation becomes normal, the accused would be bound to furnish surety bonds/bail bonds.
All District & Sessions Judges in Punjab, Haryana and Chandigarh, were asked to make a mechanism, clearly providing on their official websites, the contact numbers and e-mails of the CJMs/Duty Magistrates or other Judicial Officers on duties so that the compliance of the orders granting bail could be made. And also to upload the orders passed by the Courts in their respective Sessions Divisions, before or on the date of lockdown.

2. Sandeep Jogi vs State Of Haryana

2. (9 July 2021)
“After hearing the counsel for the parties, without commenting anything on merits of the case and going through the zimini orders passed by the trial Court regarding the delay in disposal of the trial on account of non-production of the petitioner/accused person(s) from the jail, which is primarily due to COVID-19 as there were lot of restrictions on movement and the proceedings were undertaken through video conferencing only, the same cannot be attributed to the petitioner to delay the trial and considering the fact that the petitioner is in custody for the last more than 04 years; the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not required and the conclusion of the trial will take some time due to COVID-19 situation, this petition is allowed and the petitioner is directed to be released on bail subject to his furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate/DutyMagistrate .”

14.

Manipur High Court

Digitally Signed By vs The State Of Manipur Through The Officer-in Charge, Women Police Station

(8th July 2021)
"In the instant case, there is nothing on record to show that the petitioner is delaying the trial of the case. May be, due to Covid-19 pandemic and the related lockdown and also the restricted functioning of the Courts, the trial is being delayed. However, when the under-trial prisoners are detained in jail custody to an indefinite period, Article 21 of the Constitution of India is violated. Every person, detained or arrested, is entitled to speedy trial and the Act also provides time frame to complete the trial. Merely the fact that the offence allegedly committed by the petitioner was registered under Section 4 of the POCSO Act, the petitioner cannot be denied bail on the ground that the offence is serious in nature.”

“The report further says that the petitioner was referred to JNIMS - ATC and examined and yet USG (W) done. His stomach is distended/dilated (USG) and he has been prescribed medications. Despite of medications, his symptoms of chest pain with palpitation and kidney stone related ds, hypertension could not be relieved and at this condition of his illness, it would be better for him if he receives treatment from a well-equipped hospital outside jail as proper treatment could not be given due to Covid-19 situation. Thus, the report of the medical officer shows that the petitioner is still suffering from pain abdomen since a long period and till date and the petitioner is required proper better treatment outside the jail. Therefore, this Court Is of the view that on the medical ground, the petitioner is Bail Application No. 16 of 2020 P a g e | 15 entitled to be enlarged on bail, though the offence allegedly committed by the petitioner is grave in nature.”
“It is true that victims of POCSO Act are suffering and facing social stigma, agony and trauma because of the occurrence Bail Application No. 16 of 2020 P a g e | 16 and could not recover completely from the said heinous Incident. In some of the cases, the minor victims are suffering not only mental trauma, agony, social ostracisation, but also withdrawn from the society. However, considering the petitioner‟s medical condition, which is confirmed by the medical status report, which shows that the petitioner suffers from various ailments and therefore that the threat to the petitioner‟s health in the prevailing times of Covid-19 pandemic is real and imminent and In view of the assurance extended on behalf of the petitioner that he shall not hamper or tamper the prosecution witnesses, this Court persuaded to grant bail to the petitioneronly on medical grounds for taking better treatment outside the jail.”

15

Uttarakhand High Court

Omveer Singh v. State of Uttarakhand

The court order of 6th May 2021, directed the Jail Department and Home Secretary to ensure drastic increase in inoculation of prisoners, preferably within a month of passing of this order. RT-PCR test to be conducted while releasing the prisoner so as to avoid releasing prisoners who are positive. HPCs to consider cases of undertrials and prisoners convicted for offences punishable with less than 7 years’ time. HPC is to meet every month and make recommendations from time to time. I.G. Prison to inform the Chairman of the Bar Council of Uttarakhand about E-Mulakaat. I.G. Prison also to ensure availability of proper hardware and software to facilitate prisoners to communicate with their counsels through E-Mulakaat. Counsel for the State directed to file a report on the implementation of this order within three weeks of passing of the order.

Name of State

Number of COVID-19 cases in prisons

(Inmates and staff)

Deaths

Andhra Pradesh

1375

1 death

Assam

2496

Bihar

96 + 224 + 3

4 deaths

Chhattisgarh

41

Delhi

220

1 death + 1 death

Goa

33

Gujarat

23 + 64 + 70

Haryana

1 + 2 + 36

Jammu and Kashmir

96

Jharkhand

105 + 183 + 350

Karnataka

668

Kerala

3 + 3 + 1 + 510

1 death

Madhya Pradesh

154

Maharashtra

2752

6 deaths

Odisha

175

Punjab

526

Puducherry

1

Rajasthan

140 + 126

Tamil Nadu

5 + 6 + 2 + 47

Tripura

5

Uttar Pradesh

7000

2 deaths + 1 death

Uttarakhand

85 + 205

West Bengal

265

Total

18157

17

Name of State

Total No. of Prisons and Prison Population*

Occupancy Rate*

Categories of prisoners identified for release by the High Powered Committee

Release and Change in Occupancy Rate

Estimates for release of prisoners reported

Actual number of prisoners released

Change in Occupancy Rate

(E= Estimate)

(A= Actual)

Andhra Pradesh

7579 prisoners in 112 prisons

86.2%

Prisoners who are under trial or convicted of offences for which the punishment is not more than 7 years, except (Read More):

• Prisoners/ Undertrial accused of more than one case.
• Not accused in case under Section 376 (Rape) or provisions of the POCSO Act.
• Prisoners/ Undertrials diagnosed with autoimmune diseases

1350

467

15.4% (E)

5.3% (A)

Arunachal Pradesh

247 prisoners in 1 prison

106.0%

In compliance with the order of the Supreme Court dated 23-03-2020. (Read More) The categories to be determined on:

• Nature of offence
• Duration of sentence
• Previous criminal record
• Any other relevant factors

No Information (N.I)

56

19.7% (A)

Assam

9226 prisoners in 31 prisons

103.8%

In compliance with the order of the Supreme Court dated 23-03-2020. (Read More)

3550

722

33.2% (E)

Bihar

39814 prisoners in 58 prisons

94.3%

In compliance with the order of the Supreme Court dated 23-03-2020. (Read More)

0

413

1% (A)

Chhattisgarh

18112 prisoners in 28 prisons

150.1%

• Serving or undertrial for a sentence less than 7 years.
• In prison for more than 3 months and is a resident of Chhattisgarh. (Read More)

3418

3418

28.4%

Goa

518 prisoners in 3 prison

83 %

• undertrials and convicts who are accused or convicted of offences with punishment upto or less than seven years, except people charged under special laws.
• The undertrial review committee shall undertake the responsibility of release of undertrials on parole.
• Extend the parole of convicts who are already out on parole suitably. (Read More)

44

46

7.1%(E)

7.4% (A)

Gujarat

15089 prisoners in 27 prisons

109.6%

N.I

2500

N.I

18.8% (E)

Haryana

20423 prisoners in 19 prisons

105.8 %

• All prisoners above the age of 65, except those involved in multiple crimes, will be granted a 6 week special parole. This would not apply to people booked under special laws such as NDPS, POCSO etc.
• All prisoners convicted of crimes punishable upto seven years will be considered for parole of 6 weeks, extendable to 8 weeks.
• Undertrials accused of maximum two offences in which punishment is upto two years will be considered for a 45 day interim bail, extendable upto 60 days. (Read More)

3000

4940

16.2% (E)

26.7% (A)

Himachal Pradesh

2373 prisoners in 14 prisons

110.6 %

N.I

N.I

92

4.2% (A)

Jharkhand

18654 prisoners in 28 prisons

111.1 %

N.I

N.I

869

5.4% (A)

Karnataka

14515 prisoners in 102 prisons

101.4 %

Prisoners serving sentences for offences punishable upto seven years or less. Also prisoners who have not been awarded the maximum punishment for the offences convicted for. Except those imprisoned for:

• Money Laundering
• Drug trafficking
• Terrorism
• Unlawful activities (Read More)

1379

1112

10.1% (E)

8.1% (A)

Kerala

7499 prisoners in 54 prisons

109.6 %

All prisoners (Remand and Undertrials) accused in only one offence punishable upto seven years, except:

• Prisoners having criminal antecedents
• Habitual Offenders
• Previous convictions
• Remand/Undertrials in more than one offence (Read More)

1000

1831

14.7% (E)

26.9% (A)

Madhya Pradesh

44603 prisoners in 123 prisons

155.3 %

Undertrials who have been accused of a crime punishable for a period of five years. (Read More)

12000

6589

42% (E)

23% (A)

Maharashtra

36798 prisoners in 150 prisons

152.7 %

N.I

17619

10581

50% (E)

43.9% (A)

Manipur

876 prisoners in 5 prisons

68.9 %

N.I

N.I

181

14.2% (A)

Meghalaya

1023 prisoners in 4 prisons

157.4 %

N.I

174

94

26.8% (E)

14.5% (A)

Mizoram

1698 prisoners in 7 prisons

106.1 %

N.I

338

287

21.1% (E)

17.9% (A)

Nagaland

446 prisoners in 11 prisons

30.8 %

N.I

N.I

72

5% (A)

Odisha

17563 prisoners in 91 prisons

91 %

All convicts in prisons who:

• Are not undertrial in any other cases and are serving a sentence of seven years or less with or without fine. Convicts who have one or more undertrial cases but are on bail on all of them, and have availed at least on parole peacefully.
• Are 65 years of age or above except those convicted under POCSO, NDPS, Rape, Sexual Offences, Acid Attacks or foreign nationals. (Read More)

1727

955

9.0% (E)

5.0% (A)

Punjab

24174 prisoners in 26 prisons

102.9%

N.I

6000

7177

25.5% (E)

30.6% (A)

Rajasthan

21599 prisoners in 119 prisons

94.1 %

N.I

N.I

5763

26.3 % (A)

Sikkim

400 prisoners in 2 prisons

153.8 %

N.I

N.I

N.I

N.I

Tamil Nadu

14707 prisoners in 136 prisons

62.9 %

N.I

6000

4573

20.1% (A)

26.33% (E)

Telangana

6717 prisoners in 46 prisons

86.3 %

N.I

N.I

N.I

N.I

Tripura

1103 prisoners in 13 prisons

50.7 %

N.I

557

28

25.6% (E)

1.3% (A)

Uttar Pradesh

101279 prisoners in 67 prisons

167.9 %

N.I

11000

12055

18.7% (E)

20.5% (A)

Uttarakhand

5629 in 11 prisons

159.0%

N.I

855

667

24.2% (E)

18.8% (A)

West Bengal

23092 prisoners in 58 prisons

106.1%

All prisoners convicted of a sentence of upto 7 years, irrespective of the maximum sentence prescribed in the offence, except:

• Offences under POCSO, Violence against Women, Rape, Acid attacks etc.
• Rioting and waging war against state
• Offences relating to anti-corruption
• Commercial and economic offences
• Offences under Gangsters Act
• Offences under NDPS Act. (Read More)

3076

2209

14.1% (E)

10.1% (A)

Union Territories

Andaman and Nicobar Islands

244 prisoners in 5 prisons

79%

 N.I

N.I

N.I

Dadra and Nagar Haveli

46 prisoners in 1 prison

65.7%

0

1

2.56% (A)

Daman and Diu

62 prisoners in 2 prison

103.3%

0

0

0

Delhi

17534 prisoners in 10 prisons

174.9%

On personal bond, undertrial prisoners and convicts who have been accused/convicted in offences punishable below 7 years.

3000

3573

29.9 % (E)

35.6% (A)

Chandigarh

984 prisoners in 1 prison

87.9%

N.I

545

48.7% (A)

Jammu and Kashmir

3689 prisoners in 14 prisons

126.8%

All prisoners who are convicted in one offence and have already served a term of 10 years (8 years for women), except:

• Offences of Intermediate of or large quantity recovery under NDPS Act.
• Offences under POCSO Act.
• Offences amounting to violence against women including acid attack.
• Foreign National Prisoners. (Read More)

N.I

235

8.8 % (A)

Ladakh

N.I

N.I

N.I

N.I

N.I

Lakshadweep

4 prisoner in 4 prisons

6.3%

N.I

N.I

N.I

Puducherry

263 prisoners in 4 prisons

63.2%

0

0

0

Total

478600 prisoners

118.5%

66,661

68,264

16.8% (E)

17.2% (A)