Creating A Geographical Restriction On Prisoner For Escort Visit Does Not Infringe Fundamental Rights: Kerala HC
The Kerala High Court dismissed a Writ Petition challenging the Constitutional validity of Rule 415(3) of the Kerala Prisons and Correctional Services (Management) Rules, 2014.
The Kerala High Court held that creating a geographical restriction for an escort visit on a prisoner does not violate the fundamental rights.
The Court held thus in a Writ Petition challenging the Constitutional validity of Rule 415(3) of the Kerala Prisons and Correctional Services (Management) Rules, 2014.
A Single Bench of Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas observed, “The object of an escort visit is to provide an opportunity for the prisoner to interact with his family members, in situations when he is not eligible for any kind of leave. However, the said opportunity must be within the limits of the State’s capacity. By creating a geographical restriction for an escort visit, the State cannot be said to have infringed any of the constitutional mandates.”
The Bench said that the Rules, which are based on formulations of policy, that restrict rights, ought not to be interfered with by the Court unless it is so explicitly discriminatory.
Senior Advocate Dhanya P. Ashokan was the Amicus Curiae and Public Prosecutor Sreeja V. represented the Respondents. B.G. Krishnamurthy was the party-in-person (Petitioner).
Brief Facts
The Petitioner-accused sought the grant of an escort visit to see his mother and close relatives who resided in Chikkamangaluru, Karnataka. He was facing an indictment under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967. He was arrested in 2021 and was facing trial before the Special Court (National Investigation Agency Cases). He hailed from Karnataka and his request for permission to visit his mother and near relatives was denied by the Special Court pointing out Rule 415(3) of the 2014 Rules which restricts escort visits outside the Kerala State except for the death of an immediate relative.
The Petitioner pleaded that the denial of escort visit under the said Rules to a place outside Kerala is violative of Articles 14 and 15 of the Constitution of India as it discriminates between “prisoners born outside Kerala State” and those “born in Kerala”. It was also pleaded that since the discrimination was based on the birth place, the said provision infringes the fundamental rights under Articles 15 and 19(1)(d). It was further claimed that restricting escort visit to places within Kerala except for the death of a near relative is ultra vires the Kerala Prisons and Correctional Services (Management) Act, 2010 as it goes beyond the powers under Section 79 of the Act.
Reasoning
The High Court after hearing the contentions of the counsel, noted, “On a reading of Rule 415(3) of the Rules, it is evident that the State has deemed it appropriate to restrict the right to an escort visit to be confined within a geographical limit. In the aforesaid provision, there is no reference to place of birth. On the other hand, the provision only contemplates that an escort visit shall not be granted to any prisoner to visit a place beyond the geographical limit of the State of Kerala except when death occurs in the family of the prisoner.”
The Court said that there is nothing in the Rules which indicates that the restriction is confined to persons on the basis of their place of birth and irrespective of the place of birth of a prisoner, the restriction on an escort visit will apply.
“… a person born in Kerala will also not be entitled to an escort visit outside Kerala. The Rules do not stipulate the place of birth as the criteria for classification. Notwithstanding the place of birth, a prisoner is eligible to be considered for the grant of an escort visit within the State of Kerala. Thus the classification is not on the basis of place of birth but is on a prescribed geographical limit”, it added.
Furthermore, the Court observed that the provision does not create an absolute restriction for an escort visit even outside the State and Rule 415(3) of the Rules permits an escort visit outside the State in the event of the death of an immediate relative.
“In this context, this Court cannot ignore the practical difficulties of providing escort visits for 24 hours every six months, if, for example, the immediate relatives of a few prisoners lodged in Kerala are residing in remote areas of one of the northernmost States of the country. In such situations, providing an escort visit to all such prisoners, for 24 hours every six months would lead to chaos in prison management”, it also noted.
The Court enunciated that nowhere does the Rule stipulate that a person born outside Kerala will be denied an escort visit and rather, it only creates a geographical limitation or a regulation in the grant of an escort visit.
“Such geographical restrictions and regulations being based on sound policy of the State, this Court does not find it offensive to any of the fundamental rights under Articles 14, 15 or 19 of the Constitution of India”, it added.
The Court, therefore, concluded that such a restriction cannot be held to be ultra vires the Act and thus there is nothing inconsistent with the statute.
Accordingly, the High Court dismissed the Writ Petition.
Cause Title- B.G. Krishnamurthy v. Union of India & Ors. (Neutral Citation: 2025:KER:4236)
