Hussainara khatoon v. state of bihar, 1979

Hussainara Khatoon & Ors. is a landmark case, decided on 9th March 1979, which provided a wider interpretation for Article 21 and held that speedy trial is the fundamental right of every citizen. It is the most famous case which discusses the human rights of prisoners in India

1. Hussainara Khatoon V. State Of Bihar, 1979 HARSH KUMAR

2. CONTEXT Hussainara Khatoon & Ors. it is a landmark case, decided on 9 March 1979 , which provided a comprehensive definition of Article 21 and stated that the speedy trial is a fundamental right of every citizen. The most popular case discussing the human rights of prisoners in India. Citation : 1979 AIR 1369 Court: Supreme Court of India Bench : Bhagwati, P.N., Pathak, R.S. Koshal , A.D

3. BACKGROUND An article was published in the Indian Express newspaper in 1979 regarding the detention of inmates at Bihar Prison. A few of these convicted prisoners were serving prison terms for a longer period of time, in fact, longer than their actual detention period. Adv Pushpa Kapila Hingorani was one of the readers of the article and filed a case as the Supreme Court of Public Interest in the Supreme Court of India. This was the first reported case of PIL in India and Advocate Pushpa Kapila Hingorani is considered the ‘Mother of Public Interest Trial in India’ .

4. FACTS A written petition by the habeas corpus was filed under Article 32 before the Court for the release of 17 prisoners who were being tried under the name of a newspaper in Bihar province. The Bihar district was instructed to complete a revised chart showing the wise division of the year for the inmates after they had divided themselves into two broad categories. they have been charged with minor offenses and another has been charged with a serious offense.

5. ISSUE If The Right To Speedy Trial Be Considered A Part Of Article 21? Can The Provision Of Free Legal Aid Be Enforced By The Law? ARGUMENTS It was alleged in a statement issued by the Court that most of the inmates in the case, who were detained at Patna Central Prison, Muzaffarpur Central Jail and Ranchi Central Jail before being released, had been repeatedly arraigned before magistrates. returned to the barracks as required. However, the Court found the allegations to be unsatisfactory because they did not comply with the order to release the detainees' detention dates. In addition, in order to justify the inclination of cases, it has been argued that in about 10% of cases, investigations are conducted due to delays in obtaining opinions from experts.

6. JUDGEMENT The court ruled that the detainees were given a list of names. Hingorani should be released as further detention of such persons was considered illegal and did not respect their fundamental right under Article 21 of the Constitution as they had previously been detained. in prison for the longest time in which they were to be charged. The court noted, “What faith do I have in the lost souls I have had in the judiciary that kept them from trial for so many years and kept them in prison, not because they were guilty, but because they were too poor to afford bail and courts. you do not have time to try " The State Government and the Supreme Court were required to disclose details of the area of ​​the magistrates' courts and temporary courts in Bihar Province and the total number of cases pending in each court since 31 December 1978.

7. ANALYSIS Speedy trial is a constitutionally guaranteed right in the united states . The court was of the opinion that the then-existing bail system in india was biased towards the poor who could not always arrange for a lawyer to speak for them and advised a radical change. A system that prevents the poor from being legally represented cannot be considered fair and impartial.

8. The State Cannot Deny The Constitutional Right To A Speedy Trial To The Accused By Pleading Financial Or Administrative Inability And It Was High Time The System Of Bails On Personal Bonds Like The Ones In Western Countries Were Introduced .

9. CONCLUSION The significance of the case is evident in the fact that some 40,000 prisoners were acquitted after the verdict. The case has encouraged citizens and various lawyers who are committed to the community to raise their voices against the poor and to use the broad range of Public Prosecutions for justice .

10. THANK YOU……