Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Niyaj Ahamad Abdul Jabbar, a convict lodged in Open Prison, Morshi, filed a Criminal Writ Petition before the Bombay High Court (Nagpur Bench) challenging his transfer to Special Prison, Ratnagiri and the forfeiture of 15 days of accumulated remission. He argued that these actions amounted to double jeopardy. The petitioner claimed his conduct in prison was good and he always surrendered on time during parole or furlough. The respondents, State of Maharashtra and prison authorities, denied these claims, stating that the petitioner was not doing his allotted work and was irregular in duties, leading to the forfeiture of remission approved by the District & Sessions Judge, Nagpur on 20.10.1998. Additionally, the petitioner was transferred to Special Prison, Ratnagiri from 05.06.1999 to 16.03.2001 and again from 18.01.2001 to 16.02.2003, pursuant to an order dated 25.05.1999 by the Additional Director General of Police (Prisons) due to an assault on co-prisoners on 11.09.1998. The Court examined two main issues: whether the transfer and forfeiture constituted double jeopardy, and whether prior court approval was required for transfer. The Court held that the forfeiture of remission was a valid prison punishment approved by the Sessions Judge and not challenged for over 12 years, and that transfer of a prisoner does not require prior court approval. The Court found no merit in the double jeopardy argument as the two actions were separate disciplinary measures. Consequently, the petition was dismissed.
Headnote
A) Prison Law - Double Jeopardy - Forfeiture of Remission and Transfer - The petitioner contended that transfer to Special Prison and deduction of remission constituted double jeopardy. The Court held that the two actions are separate disciplinary measures and do not amount to double jeopardy as they are not both punishments for the same offence. (Paras 2-4) B) Prison Law - Transfer of Prisoner - Prior Approval - The petitioner argued that transfer to Special Prison required prior approval of Sessions Court. The Court held that no such approval is necessary for transferring a prisoner from one prison to another. (Para 4) C) Prison Law - Forfeiture of Remission - Validity - The forfeiture of remission of 15 days was imposed by the Superintendent and approved by the District & Sessions Judge. The Court noted that this punishment was not challenged for over 12 years, and thus the contention lacks merit. (Paras 3-5)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the transfer of a prisoner to a Special Prison and forfeiture of remission amounts to double jeopardy, and whether prior approval of Sessions Court is required for such transfer.
Final Decision
The petition is dismissed. Rule discharged.
Law Points
- Double jeopardy does not apply to prison disciplinary actions
- Transfer of prisoner does not require prior court approval
- Forfeiture of remission is a valid prison punishment
