Supreme Court To Explore Use Of E-Prison Portal To Identify Prisoners Who Continue In Jail Despite Grant Of Bail

The Supreme Court today (November 19) suggested that an e-prison portal can be used for collating data on those who remain inside prisons despite being granted bail because they are unable to furnish surety. A bench of Justices Abhay S. Oka and AG Masih was hearing a suo moto case (In Re Policy Strategy for Grant of Bail) where it has passed orders to ensure that prisoners who get bail are released without delay. On the last occasion, the Court had passed directions to arrange a demonstration of how the e-prison portal works. Through an order dated November 29, 2022, the Court included the issue of the e-prison module, which was subsequently extended across the country. The two aspects of the e-prison model are: first, updating the e-prison portal with data related to Court Cases (across the country) in coordination with the Prison Authorities and second, the preparation of “Draft Information Sharing Protocol” by the National Information Centre (NIC). The e-prison portal is developed by the NIC, Delhi under the auspices of the Ministry of Home Affairs. E-prison is a prison management portal which so far has connected 1,318 prisons across the country. It aggregates the entire records of inmates from the time they are admitted to their release. The portal intends to record the entire prison cycle of the prisoners.The bench was hearing the suggestions filed by Advocate Devansh A. Mohta, amicus curiae in this case, pursuant to the demonstration. Mohta pointed out that certain areas of the e-prisons project require "immediate attention" where the Court's direction would be necessary. Publication of PTNHe pointed out the publication of PTN[pre-trial number], collation of CNR (case number record) and PID/Jail ID, tracking of cases without CNR by prison authorities, and review of statutory forms in the context of integration. He added that these forms are currently part of the Code of Criminal Procedure and manual of States. For the context, the PTN are generated by the Court as a case identifier until charges are framed. After the framing of charges, the CNR is generated for every case.Mohta pointed out that certain issues regarding PTN were found such as some prison authorities being unable to categorically inform whether PTN details were available to the Courts. In some cases, the PTN number is handwritten. Therefore, he prayed that the Court direct the Trial Courts to commence publishing PIT and FIR details on custody warrants because that is the first key identifier. This way, PTN and FIR would form a part of all communication between Courts and prisons.Justice Oka asked if assigning PTN is followed in all States to which Mohta its availability is asymmetric. Mohta explained that as per NIC, thousands of PTNs are being generated in every State. However, when the same was asked from jail authorities in order to collate the date, it was found that the PTNs were not available in many cases. He added: "Your Lordship can safely assume, majority of the States are PTN-enabled States."The Court inquired how the PTN is generated to which Mohta replied that it is generated by Courts in the remand/custody warrant and has to be generated even when the accused is produced for the first time. However, it is not generated during bail application where CNR is generated directly. Attaching information sheet with final judgmentMohta suggested that a "top-down" approach is required to be followed where appropriate directions may be passed to ensure that CNR number, Jail ID and the PID of the accused/convict are collated in all criminal cases filed and pending before the Supreme Court. This may be mentioned in an "information/sheet" for the convenience of all stakeholders. A similar exercise may be followed by the High Courts. Whereas for the Trial Courts, they may consider attaching to conviction/final judgment an information sheet comprising identifiers [PTN/CNR/FIR etc]. This will facilitate the collation of key data elements including by Higher Courts. Review of formsMohta also spoke on the aspects of reviewing the forms related to the production of documents which are utilised for communication between Courts and prisons. He added that the forms should contain key identifiers such as FIR/PTN/CNR-Jail ID/PID etc. He said: "These forms are different for different States. Once exercise is taken to review these forms, bear in mind that these information are required by other agencies also."Mohta added that for now, conviction or warrant forms could be reviewed. On this, the Court was interested to know how this facility could be used for bail application including for those who have been granted bail but could not pay the surety. Tracking of cases without CNR numberNext, Mohta pointed out that there are old and transferred cases were CNR number is not present. It was found that few States through the respective jail authorities were able to provide the oldest cases with a CNR form. He prayed that the jail authorities may be...

Supreme Court To Explore Use Of E-Prison Portal To Identify Prisoners Who Continue In Jail Despite Grant Of Bail

Gursimran Kaur Bakshi

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Gursimran Kaur Bakshi

Supreme Court To Explore Use Of E-Prison Portal To Identify Prisoners Who Continue In Jail Despite Grant Of Bail

Gursimran Kaur Bakshi

This is a premium content Available exclusively to Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Gursimran Kaur Bakshi

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers