|
Chained Again
The rearrest
of convicts who were released on mercy grounds in Uttar Pradesh throws
up pertinent questions about the lack of direction in jail reforms, writes
India Today's Subhash Mishra.
Ram Asrey
knows what it is to be fettered. And not least because he has served 20
years of a life-long sentence for murder behind bars. One of those who
were let off on a mercy consideration by former governor Suraj Bhan two
years ago, the 52-year-old of Bachwakhera village in Unnao district in
Uttar Pradesh couldn't believe his luck when he rediscovered freedom.
But just when he was getting used to the idea of spending time with his
long-lost family, the men in khaki caught up with him again and hurdled
him into the confines of a cell. The reason this time: a court order that
nullified the release.
Like Asrey,
a good number of the 1,200 other convicts who were
released by the state government in 2000 find themselves in a
similar situation. Completely shattered, they've been wondering
why they should have been given a taste of freedom if it was going to
be snatched away again. The trauma of breaking away from families with
whom they had reunited after years was much too painful. It was as if
the authorties were playing with their lives and emotions. But that is
one side of the story.
A take on
the other side perhaps begins with the mercy decision of the Ram Prakash
Gupta government itself. Although, governments do take a lenient view
every Republic Day or Independence Day and release some convicts, this
Republic Day move was different. It was the first time that such a large
scale of releases was undertaken. In fact, in a well-planned move, the
Government had even identified various categories for the release of the
convicts; male convicts of 60 years and above who had served three years
of a life term in jail, male convicts of 60 years and above who had served
a fourth of their lifer term, female convicts of 55 years and above who
had served three years of their life sentence in jail, and so on. The
proposal, approved by the Cabinet, was sent to the governor for its implementation
in January 2000. Before that, a draft proposal was amended to bring about
a change in the age limits and when it was cleared by Bhan, around 1,200
convicts walked out free.
In February 2000, however, everything changed when the
Government's decision was challenged in the high court by one
Mirza Mohammad who was a complainant of a massacre that took place in
Sakhini village in Bulandshahr district. Eleven persons were killed in
that massacre and 21 persons were named in the FIR. Of the 21 accused,
15 were sentenced to life. They were among those who were released later
on mercy grounds.
Following Mirza's plea, the high court struck off the government's
decision and ordered the re-arrest of all the 1,200 convicts. It
was a tough task tracing them but it was undertaken in right
earnest. "So far we have arrested 350 convicts and warrants have
been issued to all those who were released on mercy grounds by the governor
on January 26, 2000," lets on Rajiv Kapoor, IG, Prisons, who is determined
to implement the court's order in letter and spirit.
An SLP was filed in the Supreme Court to challenge the decision
but the apex court refused to grant relief saying that the
Government should ensure the re-arrest of all the convicts and
only then would it be possible for it to hear the case.
Much of the mess, it is alleged, was a result of a gameplan by a
senior minister of the Ram Prakash Gupta ministry to ensure the
release of some of his kin convicted for a massacre. But the high
court took a strong note of the mass release and observed that
such decisions would defeat the purpose of the criminal justice
system. "By this order, anyone can commit a heinous murder at the
age of 59 years and get released from jail within a year, if
convicted," states a senior officer of the Jail Department.
At the same time, however, the jail authorities are also ruing
over the re-arrests. As a result of this, even thoise convicts who
had served in jail with a good track record are suffering. "The
court should look into the cases in a different manner," says
Bharose Lal, one of the re-arrested convicts.
Sympathetic to such points of view, the jail authorities have
introduced a series of reforms. Suresh Chandra Srivastava, as
senior superintendent of the Modern Jail, often organised visits
of female convicts to zoos and other places. He also arranged the marriage
between two convicts and escorted two others to a dinner hosted by Bhan.
Most of the convicts at the Modern Jail work as farm labourers in the
open fields. They return to their barracks only in the evenings. But the
bottom line is that they are still not free.
|
|
|
|
|
