Supreme Court Rejects UAPA Undertrial's Plea Questioning 21-Hour Confinement A Day In Prison Cell

The Supreme Court today dismissed a plea filed by UAPA accused-Vijith Vijayan against his alleged confinement for 21 hours a day in a high security prison cell at Kerala.

A bench of Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta was dealing with Vijayan's challenge to an order passed by the Kerala High Court, which stayed for 2 months the direction passed by the Special Court for locking of prisoners in cells only in the evening (unless there's a special reason) in terms of Rule 238 of the Kerala Prisons and Correctional Services (Management) Rules, 2014.

Justice Nath said that the High Court rightly stayed the Special Court's direction and asked the petitioner to pursue the case before the High Court (which is still pending). Advocate Manika Tripathy, for Vijayan, contended that the High Court's stay is still operational (amounting to 21 hours confinement), but the bench was not convinced to intervene.

Briefly put, Vijayan is an undertrial prisoner booked under Sections 20, 38 and 39 of the UAPA. He is lodged at a High Security Prison in Viyyur since January 2021. As per claims, since 4 November 2024, he alongwith other prisoners came to be confined in the cells for 21 hours a day without any notice or reason.

Claiming violation of Rules 225 and 238 of the 2014 Rules, Vijiyan initially approached the Special Court, which issued five guidelines. One of these guidelines (guideline No.3) was: "Unless for special reasons, the prisoners shall be locked-up in the cell/ward only in the evening as provided In Rule 238."

However, in an appeal by the Superintendent of Prison, the High Court stayed guideline No.3 which, according to the petitioner, only ordered compliance with Rule 238. "the Hon'ble High Court stayed Guideline No.3 for two months without assigning any reasons, despite there being no constitutional challenge or jurisdictional objection to Rule 238. The stay order effectively suspends a valid statutory safeguard enacted to protect prisoners' personal liberty, thereby enabling continued unlawful confinement and depriving the Petitioner of protections under Article 21", the plea stated.

Case Title: VIJITH VIJAYAN Versus THE SUPERINTENDENT, HIGH SECURITY PRISON, VIYYUR AND ANR., Diary No. 227-2026