Supreme Court pulls up Principal Secretary, UP Prisons, for false statement; warns him of contempt action

Satya Prakash

New Delhi, August 25

Taking a strong exception to delay in implementing its May 13 order to decide the remission plea of a convict within a month, the Supreme Court has warned the Principal Secretary of the Prison Administration and Reforms Department of Uttar Pradesh for making a false statement on affidavit on the issue.

“We direct the Principal Secretary to personally remain present in the court on the next date,” a Bench of Justice Abhay Oka and Justice Augustine George Masih said, posting the matter for August 27.

He was present in the court even on August 20.

The Bench – which had clarified in its May 13 order that the Model Code of Conduct (MCC) will not come in the way of deciding the remission plea – on August 20 ordered petitioner Ashok Kumar’s release on temporary bail in the meanwhile. It granted liberty to Kumar to challenge the rejection order within a week by filing an amended petition.

“We have perused the affidavit of Rajesh Kumar Singh, Principal Secretary, Prison Administration and Reforms Department, Uttar Pradesh. The stand taken on oath in the said affidavit affirmed on August 14, 2024 is completely different from the solemn statements made by the same officer which were recorded in this court's order dated August 12, 2024. In fact, some of the statements made in the affidavit including the statement made in clause (g) of paragraph 5 of the affidavit appear to be false,” the Bench noted.

“We are putting him (Singh) to notice that we may consider issuing a notice of criminal contempt to him. If he wants to file a further affidavit, he is free to file the same till the next date,” the top court said.

Narrating the sequence of events after perusing the original files, the Bench said, “On May 13, 2024, we had issued a direction to the state government to consider the case of the petitioner for grant of permanent remission by observing that the Code of Conduct does not come in the way of the authorities. Time of one month was granted to report compliance.”

It said, “However, there was no movement of the file after 13th May, 2024, as can be seen from the file. The Code of Conduct came to an end on 6th June, 2024. Four days thereafter, a (file) noting has been prepared by a Secretary on 10th June, 2024. The (file) noting was signed by all concerned officers on 13th June, 2024. However, it was sent to the Hon'ble Minister on 24th June, 2024. This has to be appreciated in the light of the fact that on 13th May, 2024, this court had extended the time granted earlier by a period of one month.

“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 fil was kept pending because of the Code of Conduct appears to be fully correct as can be seen from the file,” it noted.