Consider Amending Rule Barring Inter-State Transfer Of Death Row Convict : Supreme Court To Kerala
Gursimran Kaur Bakshi
24 Aug 2026 2:51 PM IST
The Court cautioned that if the Rule is not amended, it might be struck down.
The Supreme Court today(August 24) directed the State of Kerala to file a counter-affidavit in a writ petition filed by Muhammed Ameer Ul Islam seeking transfer from prison in Kerala to a prison in his home State of Assam. Islam, a migrant labourer from Assam, was convicted and sentenced to death in the 2016 Perumbavoor law student rape and murder case.
During the hearing, the bench comprising Justice Dipankar Datta and Justice Sheel Nagu questioned the Kerala Prisons and Correctional Services (Management) Rules, 2010, which disallow transfer of death convicts from one prison to another State contrary to the Transfer of Prisoners Act, 1950. The bench asked the State of Kerala to consider amending the Rule.
Senior Advocate Rebecca John(for Islam) read Section 3 of the Transfer of Prisoners Act, 1950, and stated that prisoners sentenced to death are not allowed to be transferred unless the proceedings before the Trial Court and the High Court are over. Referring to this, she pointed out that the Trial Court has already sentenced him to death, which was confirmed by the Kerala High Court in 2024.
On this, Justice Datta asked: "Where is the consent of Assam?"
John responded that the consent of the State of Assam is yet to come. "Consent of Assam would come, but there is an outright refusal of Kerala. Assam is saying we will consider if only Kerala allows," John said.
Referring to the Kerala Prisons and Correctional Services (Management) Rules, Justice Datta asked if the petitioner has challenged Rule 587, which says that those sentenced to death are restricted from being transferred to prisons in other States.
Reading Rule 587, John said: "Any prisoner sentenced to death or a state prisoner shall not be transferred unless by special permission from the government or the presence of the accused-convict is required by the Sessions Court and the High Court for taking evidence. Both these proceedings have been over; the High Court has confirmed the death reference."
She also mentioned Rule 789, which is also being relied upon by the Kerala Government, as per which, pending appeal, the transfer can't take place. When Justice Datta asked if the vires of Rule 587 has been challenged, John clarified that initially it wasn't challenged, but the writ petition was amended later to include this.
Justice Datta suggested to the Kerala State counsel to take instructions to amend the prison rules in accordance with the central legislation to avoid it being struck down by the Court. "Now that madam has shown us the 1950 Rules, if you don't want your rule to be struck down, please advise your client."
In an earlier hearing, the Court was informed that the Kerala Government has rejected this appeal for transfer as per the prison rules, and even the Assam government had rejected his application, citing lack of jurisdiction in the matter. In 2022, when the matter was heard for the first time, the Court had issued notice to the State of Kerala, State of Assam and the Union Government.
It may be recalled that the law student was found brutally murdered in her house at Perumbavoor in Ernakulam district in 2016. She was doing her LLB course from Government Law College, Ernakulam, and lived with her mother.
The Ernakulam Principal Sessions Court found Islam guilty under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 under sections 449 (trespass), 342 (wrongful confinement), 302 (punishment for murder) and 376 (punishment for rape) and 376A (punishment for causing death or resulting in a persistent vegetative state of victim) of the Indian Penal Code. He sentenced him to death in 2017. In 2024, the Kerala High Court confirmed the death sentence.
The petitioner has approached the court seeking transfer on the ground that the rules laid down in the Kerala Prisons and Correctional Services (Management) Rules cannot be superior to the statute laid down in the Prisoners Act, 1900 and the Transfer of Prisoners Act, 1950. It was also stated that it is against the principles of natural justice to deny the transfer on the basis of rules when there exist provisions in the statute which supersede the rules.
Another ground raised by the petitioner is that he has been awarded a death sentence, which has been confirmed by the High Court and in such a situation the loved ones of the petitioner are not able to visit him in his final days due to extreme poverty. This is violative of the provisions laid down in Article 20 and 21 of the Constitution of India and the Human Rights Charter.
He also cited the case of Sunil Batra v. Delhi Administration wherein it was stated that the prisoners are to be protected from harsh or inhumane treatment during their time in jail and not to be tortured or discriminated in any way. The petitioner therefore prayed to be allowed to be transferred from Kerala to Assam to protect his fundamental rights.
Case Details: MUHAMMED AMEER UL ISLAM Vs THE STATE OF KERALA|W.P.(Crl.) No. 455/2022 Diary No. 35272 / 2022
Filed through AoR Maulshree Pathak
