{"file_name": "2024_10_1769_1801_EN.pdf", "text": "[2024] 10 S.C.R. 1769 : 2024 INSC 813\n\nSuhas Chakma \nv. \nUnion of India & Ors.\n\n(Writ Petition (C) No. 1082 of 2020)\n\n23 October 2024\n\n[B.R. Gavai and K.V. Viswanathan,* JJ.]\n\nIssue for Consideration\n\nAccess to free and timely legal aid for prison inmates.\n\nHeadnotes†\n\nFree  Legal Aid  –  Constitutional  and  Statutory  Framework  – \nConstitution  of  India  – Articles  21,  39-A  –  Equal  justice  and \nfree  legal  aid  –  Legal  Services Authorities Act,  1987  –  ss.3, \n4, 6, 9, 12-15 – Policies and Schemes by NALSA for making \nlegal services available, creating awareness about convict’s \nright of appeal, availability of free legal services – Standard \nOperating  Procedures  (SOP)  by  NALSA  on Access  to  Legal \nAid Services to Prisoners and Functioning of the Prison Legal \nAid  Clinics  2022  (SOP-2022);  SOP  For  (Under  Trial  Review \nCommittees (UTRCs); Introduction of the Legal Aid Defense \nCounsel System; Special Campaigns for prisoners to ensure \ntimely access to justice; Awareness measures; Compilation, \nTranslation of Documents; Pre-Litigation Assistance; E-Prison \nModule/E-kiosks in Prisons for effective monitoring of cases, \naccess to case updates – Elucidated – Work done by NALSA, \nSLSAs and DLSAs praised – Directions issued:\n\nHeld:  NALSA  with  SLSAs  and  DLSAs,  to  ensure  efficient \nimplementation  and  periodic  updates  of  the  SOP-2022  –  Legal \nServices Authorities  to  strengthen  the  monitoring  of  PLACs  and \nperiodically  review  their  functioning  –  Legal  Services Authorities \nwill  periodically  update  and  address  shortcomings;  ensure  full \nimplementation of Legal Aid Defence Counsel System; periodically \nreview and update SOP-2022 for the UTRC – Awareness crucial \nfor legal aid mechanism; robust, regularly updated mechanism to \nbe in place by following measures such as boards with legal aid \ncontact details be displayed at public places like police stations, \nbus stands, railway stations etc. both in local language and English; \n\n* Author\n\n\f1770 \n\n[2024] 10 S.C.R.\n\nPromotional campaigns through local radio, AIR, TV, and digitally \nby mentioning on websites of the legal services authority; street \nplays in rural areas – Addressing gap between number of persons \nidentified by UTRC and those recommended for release; number of \nprisoners recommended for release and number of bail applications \nand taking adequate corrective measures – NALSA’s “Early Access \nto  Justice  at  Pre-arrest, Arrest  and  Remand  Stage  Framework” \nfor  pre-litigation  assistance  should  be  diligently  pursued  and \nperiodically reviewed – Legal Service Authorities should periodically \ninteract with convicts who had not filed appeals and inform them of \ntheir right to free legal aid – Periodic interactions with Jail Visiting \nLawyers  (JVLs)  and  Para  Legal  Volunteers  (PLVs)  will  ensure \nupdation of their knowledge for efficient system functioning – Legal \nServices Authorities should ensure ongoing education for lawyers \ninvolved  in  pre-litigation  assistance  and  those  associated  with \nthe  Legal Aid  Defence  Counsel  System  –  DLSAs  should  submit \nperiodic reports to the SLSAs and the SLSAs to the NALSA and \nNALSA should digitize the process for real time updates – Union \nGovt.  and  State  Govts.  will  continue  to  support  Legal  Services \nAuthorities  for  the  effective  implementation  of  measures  –  High \nCourts  may  consider  issuing  a  practice  direction  that  all  courts \nincluding the High Court may attach a coversheet to the copy of \nthe judgments and notices issued to the respondents in appeals \nagainst  acquittal,  informing  the  convict  about  free  legal  aid  for \nhigher remedies with address and phone number of the legal aid \ncommittee – High Courts may display information about the legal \naid facilities available in the State on their website. [Para 34]\n\nCase Law Cited\n\nHussainara Khatoon and Others (IV) v. Home Secretary, State of \nBihar,  Patna  [1979]  3  SCR  532  :  (1980)  1  SCC  98;  Khatri  and \nOthers (2) v. State of Bihar and Others [1981] 3 SCR 145 : (1981) \n1  SCC  627;  Suk  Das  v.  Union  Territory  of Arunachal  Pradesh \n[1986] 1 SCR 590 : (1986) 2 SCC 401; Madhav Hayawadanrao \nHoskot  v.  State  of  Maharashtra  [1979]  1  SCR  192  :  (1978)  3 \nSCC  544;  Sunil  Batra  (II)  v.  Delhi Administration  [1980]  2  SCR \n557  :  (1980)  3  SCC  488;  Girish  Gandhi  vs.  State  of  UP  [2024] \n8 SCR 561 : 2024 SCC OnLine SC 2142; Sanjit Saha vs. State \nof  West  Bengal  [2023]  15  SCR  83  :  2023  INSC  1085;  Ramu  v. \nState of U.P. 2024 SCC OnLine All 4618; Ramanand @ Nandlal \nBharti v. State of U.P. [2022] 5 SCR 162 : 2022 SCC Online SC \n1396 – referred to.\n\nDigital Supreme Court Reports\f[2024] 10 S.C.R.  \n\n1771\n\nList of Acts\n\nConstitution of India; Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987; Bhartiya \nNagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.\n\nList of Keywords\n\nArticles 21, 39-A of the Constitution of India; Access to free legal \naid  for  prison  inmates;  Prisoners;  Legal  aid  facilities;  Legal  aid \ncommittee;  Equal  justice  and  free  legal  aid;  Timely  access  to \njustice; Legal Services Authorities; National Legal Services Authority \n(NALSA); State Legal Services Authorities (SLSAs); District Legal \nServices Authorities (DLSAs); Creating awareness about availability \nof  free  legal  services;  Standard  Operating  Procedures  (SOP) \nby  NALSA  on  Access  to  Legal  Aid  Services  to  Prisoners  and \nFunctioning of the Prison Legal Aid Clinics 2022 (SOP-2022); SOP \nFor (Under Trial Review Committees (UTRCs); Legal Aid Defense \nCounsel  System;  Special  Campaigns  for  prisoners; Awareness \nmeasures; Compilation, Translation of Documents; Pre-Litigation \nAssistance;  E-Prison  Module/E-kiosks;  Promotional  campaigns; \nLegal  aid  mechanism;  Legal Aid  Defence  Counsel  Dystem;  Jail \nVisiting  Lawyers  (JVLs);  Para  Legal  Volunteers  (PLVs);  Legal \nawareness camps; Prison Legal Aid Clinics (PLACs); Jail appeals; \nHigher remedies; Appeals; Appellate rights of the convicts; Right \nof appeal; Facility available for availing free legal services. \n\nCase Arising From\n\nCIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION: Writ Petition No. 1082 of 2020\n\n(Under Article 32 of The Constitution of India)\n\nAppearances for Parties\n\nVijay  Hansaria,  K.  Parameshwar,  Sr.  Advs./Amicus  Curiae,   \nMs. Kavya Jhawar, Ms. Nandini Rai, Ms. Kanti, Ms. Raji Gururaj, \nShreenivas  Patil,  Ms.  Chitransha  Singh  Sikarwar, Anuj  Kapoor, \nSatish Pandey, Advs. for the Petitioner.\n\nTushar  Mehta,  Solicitor  General,  Suryaprakash  V  Raju,   \nMrs. Aishwarya  Bhati, A.S.Gs.,  Mrs.  Garima  Prasad,  Sr. A.A.G., \nShiv Mangal Sharma, Dr. Hemant Gupta, A.A.Gs., Praneet Pranav, \nD.A.G., Nalin Kohli, Sr. Adv., Rajan K Chourasia, Kanu Agrawal, \nRaghav  Sharma,  Ms.  Priyanka  Terdal, Arvind  Kumar  Sharma,   \nMs. Prerna Singh, Guntur Pramod Kumar, Dhruv Yadav, Gautam \n\nSuhas Chakma v. Union of India & Ors.\f1772 \n\n[2024] 10 S.C.R.\n\nBhatia,  Abhimanyu  Tewari,  Ms.  Eliza  Bar,  Shuvodeep  Roy, \nDeepayan  Dutta,  Saurabh  Tripathi,  Ms.  Nimisha  Menon, Anshul \nMalik, Ms. Shruti Agrawal, Ayuushman Aroraa, Abhishek Pandey, \nPrashant Kumar Umrao, Ms. Swati Ghildiyal, Ms. Devyani Bhatt, \nMs.  Neha  Singh,  Akshay  Girish  Ringe,  Ms.  Inderdeep  Kaur \nRaina, Kartikeya Rastogi, Nishe Rajen Shonker, Mrs. Anu K Joy, \nAlim  Anvar,  Ajith  Anto  Perumbully,  Parth  Awasthi,  Pashupathi \nNath  Razdan,  Kshitiz  Singh,  Anand  Dilip  Landge,  Siddharth \nDharmadhikari, Aaditya Aniruddha Pande, Pukhrambam Ramesh \nKumar,  Karun  Sharma,  Ms. Anupama  Ngangom,  Ms.  Rajkumari \nDivyasana, Anando  Mukherjee,  Shwetank  Singh,  Milind  Kumar, \nSaurabh Rajpal, Ms. Saubhagya Sundnriyal, Sameer Abhyankar, \nAyushi  Bansal, Aakash Thakur, Aryan  Srivastava,  Rahul  Kumar, \nSarthak  Dora,  Sabarish  Subramanian,  Vishnu  Unnikrishnan,   \nC. Kranthi Kumar, Sarathraj B, Danish Saifi, Ms. Aswani Satheesh, \nPradeep Misra, Daleep Dhyani, Sanjay Jain, Suraj Singh, Manan \nVerma, Ms. Ayushi Hatwal, Sanjeev Kaushik, Ms. Astha Sharma, \nSimranjeet  Singh  Rekhi,  Tadimalla  Bhaskar  Gowtham,  Bhuvan \nKapoor, Varun Chugh, Krishna Kant Dubey, Shreekant Neelappa \nTerdal,  Mukesh  Kumar  Maroria,  Ketan  Paul,  Mayank  Pandey,   \nMs.  Shivika  Mehra,  Ishaan  Sharma,  Sarthak  Karol,  Ms. Astha \nSingh,  Jagdish  Chandra  Solanki,  Ms.  Rashmi  Nandakumar,   \nMs. Yashmita  Pandey,  Ms.  K.  Enatoli  Sema, Amit  Kumar  Singh, \nMs. Chubalemla Chang, Prang Newmai, Shivang Jain, Varun Goel, \nAdvs. for the Respondents.\n\nJudgment / Order of the Supreme Court\n\nJudgment\n\nK.V. Viswanathan, J.\n\nBrief Facts:\n\n1.  The  present  Writ  Petition,  under Article  32  of  the  Constitution  of \nIndia, was filed primarily for issuance an appropriate Writ, Order or \ndirection  directing  the  respondents  Union  of  India,  States  and  the \nUnion Territories to ensure that no prisoner is subjected to torture, \ncruel,  inhumane  and  degrading  treatment  or  punishment  because \nof  living  in  overcrowded  and  unhygienic  conditions  in  jail.  It  also \nespouses  the  cause  that  all  persons  deprived  of  their  liberty  are \n\nDigital Supreme Court Reports\f[2024] 10 S.C.R.  \n\n1773\n\nentitled to be treated with humanity, and with respect for the inherent \ndignity and a prayer was made for creating a permanent mechanism \nto decongest the overcrowded prisons.\n\n2.  When the Writ Petition came up for hearing on 22.04.2024, this Court \nappointed Shri Vijay Hansaria, learned Senior Advocate as Amicus \nCuriae.  Thereafter,  on  09.05.2024,  Shri  K.  Parameshwar,  learned \nSenior Advocate (as Amicus Curiae) and Ms. Rashmi Nandakumar, \nlearned counsel for the National Legal Services Authority (NALSA) \nwere requested to assist the Court alongside the already appointed \nAmicus  Curiae.  On  that  day  Shri  Vijay  Hansaria,  learned Amicus \nCuriae tendered to Court the format of a letter to be submitted by the \nJail Visiting Lawyers (JVLs) regarding information to convicts on free \nlegal aid. Ms. Rashmi Nandakumar, learned counsel was asked to \ntake instructions from NALSA in this regard. Thereafter, in its order \nof 17.05.2024, broadly two issues were identified- one pertaining to \nOpen Correctional Institutions and the other with regard to modalities \nfor visitation by lawyers in jail so as to ensure free legal aid to the \ndeserving prison inmates. On 17.05.2024, Ms. Rashmi Nandakumar, \nlearned counsel informed the Court that the format of letter initially \nhanded  over  by  the  learned Amicus  has  been  slightly  modified  in \nconsultation with NALSA and the said modified letter to be filled by \nthe JVLs were taken on record and approved. \n\n3.  By a note submitted by learned counsel - Ms. Rashmi Nandakumar \non 15.07.2024, it was set out that the letter, as approved in the order \nof 17.05.2024, was circulated by the NALSA to all the State Legal \nServices Authorities (SLSAs) and a direction was issued to them to \ncollate  the  data  received  by  JVLs  and  compile  the  information  as \nper the format prescribed by NALSA. Details of responses received \ntill 15th July, 2024 were also set out and directions were issued to \nother States to file their responses. When the matter was taken up \non  09.09.2024,  a  detailed  note  dated  06.09.2024  was  placed  on \nrecord by Ms. Rashmi Nandakumar, learned counsel on the aspect \nof  access  to  free  legal  aid  for  the  deserving  prison  inmates.  This \njudgment deals with the aspect of access to free legal aid for prison \ninmates. The issue of “Open Correctional Institutions” will be heard \nand considered separately by the Court. \n\n4.  We have heard Mr. Vijay Hansaria learned Amicus Curiate and Ms. \nRashmi  Nandakumar,  learned  counsel.  We  have  considered  the \ndetailed note submitted by the NALSA. \n\nSuhas Chakma v. Union of India & Ors.\f1774 \n\n[2024] 10 S.C.R.\n\nConstitutional Goal\n\n5.  Article 39-A of the Directive Principles of State Policy which talks of \n\nequal justice and free legal aid reads as under: \n\n39-A. Equal justice and free legal aid.-\n\nThe  State  shall  secure  that  the  operation  of  the  legal \nsystem promotes justice, on a basis of equal opportunity, \nand shall, in particular, provide free legal aid, by suitable \nlegislation or schemes or in any other way, to ensure that \nopportunities  for  securing  justice  are  not  denied  to  any \ncitizen by reason of economic or other disabilities.\n\nRelevant Judicial Pronouncements\n\n6.  This  Court  in  Hussainara  Khatoon  and  Others  (IV)  v.  Home \nSecretary, State of Bihar, Patna (1980) 1 SCC 98, held as under:\n\n“6. …. It is not uncommon to find that undertrial prisoners \nwho are produced before the Magistrates are unaware of \ntheir right to obtain release on bail and on account of their \npoverty, they are unable to engage a lawyer who would \napprise them of their right to apply for bail and help them \nto secure release on bail by making a proper application to \nthe Magistrate in that behalf. Sometimes the Magistrates \nalso  refuse  to  release  the  undertrial  prisoners  produced \nbefore them on their personal bond but insist on monetary \nbail  with  sureties,  which  by  reason  of  their  poverty  the \nundertrial  prisoners  are  unable  to  furnish  and  which, \ntherefore, effectively shuts out for them any possibility of \nrelease from pre-trial detention… \n\nWe  do  not  think  it  is  possible  to  reach  the  benefits  of \nthe  legal  process  to  the  poor,  to  protect  them  against \ninjustice  and  to  secure  to  them  their  constitutional  and \nstatutory rights unless there is a nation-wide legal service \nprogramme  to  provide  free  legal  services  to  them.  It  is \nnow well settled, as a result of the decision of this Court in \nManeka Gandhi v. Union of India [(1978) 1 SCC 248] that \nwhen Article 21 provides that no person shall be deprived \nof his life or liberty except in accordance with the procedure \nestablished by law, it is not enough that there should be \n\nDigital Supreme Court Reports\f[2024] 10 S.C.R.  \n\n1775\n\nsome  semblance  of  procedure  provided  by  law,  but  the \nprocedure under which a person may be deprived of his \nlife or liberty should be “reasonable, fair and just”. Now, a \nprocedure which does not make available legal services \nto an accused person who is too poor to afford a lawyer \nand  who  would,  therefore,  have  to  go  through  the  trial \nwithout legal assistance, cannot possibly be regarded as \n“reasonable, fair and just”. It is an essential ingredient of \nreasonable, fair and just procedure to a prisoner who is \nto seek his liberation through the court’s process that he \nshould have legal services available to him….. \n\n(Emphasis supplied)\n\nFurther, this Court in Khatri and Others (2) v. State of Bihar and \nOthers (1981) 1 SCC 627, para 6, held as under:\n\n6.  But  even  this  right  to  free  legal  services  would  be \nillusory for an indigent accused unless the Magistrate or \nthe Sessions Judge before whom he is produced informs \nhim of such right.\n\n….It would make a mockery of legal aid if it were to be left \nto a poor ignorant and illiterate accused to ask for free legal \nservices. Legal aid would become merely a paper promise \nand  it  would  fail  of  its  purpose.  The  Magistrate  or  the \nSessions Judge before whom the accused appears must \nbe held to be under an obligation to inform the accused \nthat if he is unable to engage the services of a lawyer on \naccount  of  poverty  or  indigence,  he  is  entitled  to  obtain \nfree legal services at the cost of the State. Unfortunately, \nthe Judicial Magistrates failed to discharge this obligation \nin the case of the blinded prisoners and they merely stated \nthat no legal representation was asked for by the blinded \nprisoners  and  hence  none  was  provided.  We  would, \ntherefore, direct the Magistrates and Sessions Judges in \nthe country to inform every accused who appears before \nthem and who is not represented by a lawyer on account \nof his poverty or indigence that he is entitled to free legal \nservices at the cost of the State. Unless he is not willing \nto take advantage of the free legal services provided by \n\nSuhas Chakma v. Union of India & Ors.\f1776 \n\n[2024] 10 S.C.R.\n\nthe State, he must be provided legal representation at the \ncost of the State…..”\n\n(Emphasis supplied)\n\n7.  This Court has held that free legal assistance for poor and indigent \nat  the  cost  of  the  State  is  a  fundamental  right  of  a  person  under \nArticle 21 even if the person does not seek legal assistance on his \nown. In Suk Das v. Union Territory of Arunachal Pradesh (1986) \n2 SCC 401, this Court held as under.-\n\n“6.  But  the  question  is  whether  this  fundamental  right \ncould  lawfully  be  denied  to  the  appellant  if  he  did  not \napply for free legal aid. Is the exercise of this fundamental \nright conditioned upon the accused applying for free legal \nassistance so that if he does not make an application for \nfree legal assistance the trial may lawfully proceed without \nadequate legal representation being afforded to him? Now \nit  is  common  knowledge  that  about  70  per  cent  of  the \npeople  living  in  rural  areas  are  illiterate  and  even  more \nthan that percentage of the people are not aware of the \nrights  conferred  upon  them  by  law.  Even  literate  people \ndo not know what are their rights and entitlements under \nthe  law.  It  is  this  absence  of  legal  awareness  which  is \nresponsible for the deception, exploitation and deprivation \nof  rights  and  benefits  from  which  the  poor  suffer  in  this \nland.  Their  legal  needs  always  stand  to  become  crisis-\noriented  because  their  ignorance  prevents  them  from \nanticipating  legal  troubles  and  approaching  a  lawyer  for \nconsultation and advice in time and their poverty magnifies \nthe impact of the legal troubles and difficulties when they \ncome. Moreover, because of their ignorance and illiteracy, \nthey  cannot  become  self-reliant:  they  cannot  even  help \nthemselves. The law ceases to be their protector because \nthey do not know that they are entitled to the protection of \nthe law and they can avail of the legal service programme \nfor  putting  an  end  to  their  exploitation  and  winning  their \nrights…” \n\n(Emphasis supplied)\n\nDigital Supreme Court Reports\f[2024] 10 S.C.R.  \n\n1777\n\n8. \n\nIn Madhav Hayawadanrao Hoskot v. State of Maharashtra (1978) 3 \nSCC 544, this Court, while holding that right to counsel for a prisoner \nis a fundamental right traceable to Article 21, held that procedural \nsafeguards are the indispensable essence of liberty. This Court held \nas under:- \n\n“14. The other ingredient of fair procedure to a prisoner, \nwho has to seek his liberation through the court process \nis  lawyer’s  services.  Judicial  justice,  with  procedural \nintricacies, legal submissions and critical examination of \nevidence, leans upon professional expertise; and a failure \nof equal justice under the law is on the cards where such \nsupportive  skill  is  absent  for  one  side.  Our  judicature, \nmoulded  by  Anglo-American  models  and  our  judicial \nprocess, engineered by kindred legal technology, compel \nthe collaboration of lawyer-power for steering the wheels \nof equal justice under the law. Free legal services to the \nneedy is part of the English criminal justice system. And \nthe American jurist, Prof. Vance of Yale, sounded sense \nfor  India  too  when  he  said:  [  Justice  and  Reform,  Earl \nJohnson, Jr. p. 11] \n\n“What  does  it  profit  a  poor  and  ignorant  man  that \nhe is equal to his strong antagonist before the law if \nthere is no one to inform him what the law is? Or that \nthe courts are open to him on the same terms as to \nall other persons when he has not the wherewithal \nto pay the admission fee?”\n\nxx xx xx\n\n25.  If  a  prisoner  sentenced  to  imprisonment,  is  virtually \nunable to exercise his constitutional and statutory right of \nappeal, inclusive of special leave to appeal, for want of legal \nassistance, there is implicit in the Court under Article 142, \nread with Articles 21 and 39-A of the Constitution, power \nto assign counsel for such imprisoned individual “for doing \ncomplete justice”. This is a necessary incident of the right \nof  appeal  conferred  by  the  Code  and  allowed  by Article \n136  of  the  Constitution.  The  inference  is  inevitable  that \nthis is a State’s duty and not Government’s charity. Equally \naffirmative is the implication that while legal services must \n\nSuhas Chakma v. Union of India & Ors.\f1778 \n\n[2024] 10 S.C.R.\n\nbe  free  to  the  beneficiary,  the  lawyer  himself  has  to  be \nreasonably remunerated for his services…..\n\n26. In the present petition, the party, though preferred legal \naid by the court, preferred to argue himself. Even so we \nuphold the right to counsel not in the permissive sense of \nArticle 22(1) and its wider amplitude but in the peremptory \nsense of Article 21 confined to prison situations.\n\n(Emphasis supplied)\n\n9. \n\nIn  Sunil  Batra  (II)  v.  Delhi Administration.  (1980)  3  SCC  488  in \nPara 30 and 78(3), this Cout held as under.-\n\n“30.  We,  therefore,  affirm  that  where  the  rights  of  a \nprisoner, either under the Constitution or under other law, \nare  violated  the  writ  power  of  the  court  can  and  should \nrun  to  his  rescue.  There  is  a  warrant  for  this  vigil.  The \ncourt process casts the convict into the prison system and \nthe deprivation of his freedom is not a blind penitentiary \naffliction  but  a  belighted  institutionalisation  geared  to  a \nsocial good. The court has a continuing responsibility to \nensure that the constitutional purpose of the deprivation \nis not defeated by the prison administration….\n\n78(3).  Lawyers  nominated  by  the  District  Magistrate, \nSessions Judge, High Court and the Supreme Court will \nbe given all facilities for interviews, visits and confidential \ncommunication  with  prisoners  subject  to  discipline  and \nsecurity  considerations.  This  has  roots  in  the  visitatorial \nand supervisory judicial role. The lawyers so designated \nshall be bound to make periodical visits and record and \nreport to the concerned court results which have relevance \nto legal grievances.”\n\n(Emphasis supplied)\n\nThe Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987\n\n10.  To give effect to the constitutional goal under Article 39-A, the Legal \nServices Authorities Act, 1987 was enacted. As the preamble to the \nAct sets out, the Act was to constitute legal services authorities to \nprovide free and competent legal services to the weaker sections of \nsociety, to ensure that opportunities for securing justice are not denied \n\nDigital Supreme Court Reports\f[2024] 10 S.C.R.  \n\n1779\n\nto any citizen by reason of any economic or other disabilities. Under \nSection 3 of the Act, the National Legal Services Authority (NALSA) \nis constituted. Under Section 4, the functions of the NALSA are set \nout and the relevant ones for the purpose of the present issue are \n(a) (b) (c) and (i). They are extracted herein below. \n\n“4. Functions of the Central Authority.—\n\nThe Central Authority shall perform all or any of the following \nfunctions, namely:\n\n(a)  lay  down  policies  and  principles  for  making  legal \nservices available under the provisions of this Act;\n\n(b) frame the most effective and economical schemes for \nthe purpose of making legal services available under the \nprovisions of this Act;\n\n(c) utilise the funds at its disposal and make appropriate \nallocations  of  funds  to  the  State Authorities  and  District \nAuthorities;\n\n(i)  monitor  and  evaluate  implementation  of  the  legal \naid  programmes  at  periodic  intervals  and  provide  for \nindependent  evaluation  of  programmes  and  schemes \nimplemented in whole or in part by funds provided under \nthis Act;”\n\nSection  6  and 9 deal with the constitution of State Legal Services \nAuthority  and  the  District  Legal  Services  Authority  respectively. \nSection  12  of  the Act  is  a  significant  provision.  Section  12,  inter \nalia, sets out that every person in custody who has to file or defend \na case shall be entitled to legal services under the Act. Section 13 \nmandates that persons who satisfy all or any of the criteria specified \nin Section 12 shall be entitled to receive legal services provided that \nthe concerned authority is satisfied that such persons have a prima \nfacie case to prosecute or to defend. Section 14 speaks of grants by \nCentral Government and Section 15 speaks of the National Legal Aid \nFund and the application thereof. In exercise of its power NALSA has \nbeen periodically laying down the policies and principles for making \nlegal services available under the provisions of the Act and framing \nschemes and providing for utilization of funds. \n\nSuhas Chakma v. Union of India & Ors.\f1780 \n\n[2024] 10 S.C.R.\n\nNALSA-Standard Operating Procedures on Access to Legal Aid \nServices to Prisoners and Functioning of the Prison Legal Aid \nClinics - 2022 \n\n11.  As the note submitted by the learned counsel indicate, furtherance \nof this function NALSA has formulated the SOP on access to legal \naid  services  to  prisoners  and  functioning  of  the  Prison  Legal Aid \nClinics (PLACs) (hereinafter referred to as NALSA SOP-2022). The \nNALSA  SOP-2022  deals  with  (i)  The  setting  up  and  functioning \nof  the  PLACs  (ii)  The  purpose  behind  establishing  the  PLACs  \n(iii) The Roles and responsibilities of different legal aid functionaries \nattached with the PLACs (iv) The monitoring of PLACs by DLSAs. \n(v)  The  process  of  application  for  legal  aid  and  role  of  PLACs  in \nfacilitating  appointment  of  legal  aid  lawyer  (vi)  The  PLACs  role  in \nproviding legal aid services and legal assistance to the vulnerable \ngroups in prisons; (vii) The PLACs role in providing legal information \nto prisoners and their families; (viii) The PLACs role in imparting legal \nknowledge to prisoners about their rights and their grievance redressal \nmechanism; and (ix) The PLACs role in giving legal assistance for \nfiling  Jail Appeals  before  the  High  Courts  and  the  Supreme  Court \nby the convicts in prison.\n\n12.  As set out in the note, the NALSA SOP-2022 enumerates the following \n\nfunctions of the PLACs:-\n\n\"a. \n\nto  ensure  at  all  times  that  no  prisoner  is  without \nlegal  representation  at  any  stage  of  the  criminal \nproceedings  and  to  generate  awareness  about  the \nsame;\n\nb. \n\nc. \n\nd. \n\ne. \n\nto bridge the information gap between the prisoner \nand the Court;\n\nto facilitate communication between the prisoner and \nthe lawyer, whether legal aid or private;\n\nto ensure that no person is illegally or unnecessarily \ndetained;\n\nto ensure special needs of vulnerable groups (women, \nyoung  offenders,  mentally-ill,  foreign  nationals, \npersons  from  other  states,  etc.);  in  prisons  are \naddressed;\n\nDigital Supreme Court Reports\f[2024] 10 S.C.R.  \n\n1781\n\nf. \n\ng. \n\nh. \n\nto  collaborate  with  local  authorities,  universities, \nacademic institutions and civil society organizations \nto further strengthen legal aid services for prisoners;\n\nto  act  as  a  One  Stop  Centre  (OSC)  to  raise  the \ngrievances of the prisoners and direct the grievances \nto appropriate authorities through DLSA; and\n\nto undertake the implementation of the NALSA and \nSLSA  campaigns  for  prisoners  or  any  other  work \nassigned  to  fulfil  its  mandate  of  providing  legal  aid \nservices and assistance to the prisoners.”\n\n13.  NALSA  SOP-2022  also  deals  with  the  duties  of  the  JVLs  and  the \nParalegal Volunteers (PLVs). The duties of the JVLs, as set out in \nthe note, are as follows :-\n\n\"a)  To  identify  cases  eligible  for  release  under  the \nmandate of the Undertrial Review Committee (UTRC);\n\nb)  To  interact  with  inmates  identified  by  the  paralegal \n\nvolunteers and provide legal advice;\n\nc)  To draft applications and petitions for parole/juvenility/\nbail  etc.  for  the  undertrials  and  convicts  present  in \nthe clinic;\n\nd)  To ensure filling of legal aid application form for those \nwho need legal aid lawyers and submit the same to \nthe legal services authority, without any delay;\n\ne)  To  conduct  legal  awareness  camps  inside  prisons \nincluding apprising new entrants to prison about the \nfree legal services provided by Tehsil Legal Services \nCommittee (TSLC) or Sub-Divisional Legal Services \nCommittee (SDLSC), District Legal Services Authority \n(DLSA),  High  Court  Legal  Services  Committee \n(HCLSC)  and  Supreme  Court  Legal  Services \nCommittee (SCLSC);\n\nf) \n\nTo regularly  inform the inmates  about  the  status of \ntheir cases;\n\ng)  To communicate to the defense lawyer any pertinent \ninformation that an inmate has requested to be shared \nwith his/her lawyer;\n\nSuhas Chakma v. Union of India & Ors.\f1782 \n\n[2024] 10 S.C.R.\n\nh)  To  also  represent  the  inmates  in  courts  in  some \ncases,  if  appointed  by  the  Legal  Service  Institution \nbut not otherwise;\n\ni) \n\nj) \n\nTo prioritize and focus on personal interactions with \nthe  inmates  in  the  PLAC  during  the  visit  and  then \ndocument and prepare the petitions;\n\nTo assist the UTRC by coordinating with the inmates \nand the courts on cases eligible for release;\n\nk)  To follow the directions given under NALSA SOP for \n\nrepresenting persons in custody;\n\nl) \n\nTo  bring  into  notice  of  DLSA  about  the  concern  of \ninmates in respect of conditions in jail;\n\nm)  Updating information on digital platform of legal aid \n\nand legal aid e-prison.”\n\nThe duties of the PLVs are as under:\n\n\"a)  To establish/ manage Legal Aid Clinics inside prisons, \n\nas prescribed; \n\nb)  To take steps towards identification of prison inmates \nwho are in need of legal assistance. This would involve \nreaching out to all prisoners whether beneficiary of \nlegal aid or not, especially the new entrants;\n\nc)  To seek permission from the prison authorities to visit \nthe  wards/enclosures  of  prisoners  to  ascertain  that \nno one remains unrepresented;\n\nd)  To fill out the legal aid application form and promptly \nsend it to the concerned DLSA/TLSC & also ensure \nthat the prisoners interact with the Jail Visiting Lawyer \non his next visit to prison;\n\ne)  To coordinate and assist the Jail Visiting Lawyers in \n\nproviding legal advice and aid;\n\nf) \n\nTo give updates on the proceedings in a case to the \ninmates;\n\ng)  To counsel inmates and explain any legal provision \npertaining to their case. Where there are doubts, then \nrefer the case to the Jail Visiting Lawyer;\n\nDigital Supreme Court Reports\f[2024] 10 S.C.R.  \n\n1783\n\nh)  To receive legal aid lawyer appointment letters, replies \nfrom legal service institutions and other authorities, \nmaintain  record  and  give  copies  to  the  concerned \nprisoner;\n\ni) \n\nj) \n\nTo submit reports to the DLSA about the Undertrial \nReview  Committee  on  cases  eligible  under  section \n436/436A Cr.P.C.;\n\nTo keep track of non-production of any inmate in the \nCourt as per the date given and inform the Secretary, \nDLSA/SDLSC or TLCS;\n\nk)  To assist the prison inmate in filing any complaint or \ngrievances relating to their stay in prison; and\n\nl) \n\nTo send reminders/letters to the corresponding Legal \nServices  Authority  to  seek  information  regarding \nstatus  of  case,  name  and  contact  details  of  the \nassigned legal aid lawyer.”\n\n14.  Under Para 15 of the NALSA SOP-2022, the procedure for ensuring \nsmooth  filing  of  petitions  of  the  convicts  in  High  Courts  and  the \nSupreme Court has been outlined as follows:\n\n\"a)  As  soon  as  the  order  rejecting  bail  or  an  order  of \nconviction  is  pronounced  by  the  Court  (Magistrate \nCourt, Sessions Court or High Court), a prisoner shall \nbe informed by the PLAC regarding the right to bail/\nappeal/review/revision  in  the  High  Court/Supreme \nCourt and the process of filing the same.\n\nb)  Steps must be taken promptly through the PLAC to \napply  for  appointment  of  lawyer  by  the  High  Court \nLegal Services Committee (HCLSC) or the Supreme \nCourt  Legal  Services  Committee  (SCLSC),  as  the \ncase may be. A record of such application must be \nmade in designated register/database.\n\nc)  Where  copy  of  judgement  is  not  available  with  the \nprisoner,  the  DLSA  shall  make  available  an  extra \ncopy of the judgement to the prisoner to enable filing \nof the petition/jail appeal.\n\nSuhas Chakma v. Union of India & Ors.\f1784 \n\n[2024] 10 S.C.R.\n\nd)  Upon  receiving  a  request  for  legal  assistance,  the \nHCLSC/SCLSC must immediately appoint a lawyer \nto the case, details of whom must be duly intimated \nto  the  prisoner  via  the  Prison  Superintendent,  as \nper  prescribed  formats  provided  in  the  NALSA’s \nHandbook of Formats, 2020.\n\ne)  Details  of  the  lawyer  appointed  by  the  HCLSC/\nSCLSC must be duly noted in the register/database \nmaintained at the PLAC.\n\nf)  Regular  interaction  and  communication  between \nthe counsel and the client/ convict must be ensured \nby  SCLSC,  HCLSC,  DLSA  and  SLSA  in  order  to \nupdate the beneficiary as to the progress of the case. \nWhere the prisoners complain of lack of interaction \nwith lawyer assigned by HCLSC/SCLSC, the DLSA \nshall  intimate  the  same  to  the  HCLSC/SCLSC  at \nthe earliest.\n\ng)  The  PLV  shall  provide  updates  to  the  prisoner  on \nprogress in his/her case. Information may be sourced \ndirectly  from  the  HCLSC/SCLSC  or  through  the \nrelevant Court websites.\n\nh)  DLSA may undertake to jointly conduct camps with \nHCLSC/SCLSC  to  apprise  prisoners  of  the  various \nremedies  in  law  for  bail/appeal/review/revision  as \nwell as writ remedies.”\n\nNALSA has also adopted methods to strengthen the monitoring of \nPLACs and to review their functioning.\n\nStatistical Data\n\n15.  NALSA  has  stated  that  as  per  the  information  received  from  the \nSLSAs, there are a total of 1265 Jails (including sub jails and women \njails), 1256 PLACs and 6663 Jail Visiting Lawyers. As of 2023-24, \nNALSA  has  interacted  with  4,56,798  inmates  and  provided  legal \nassistance to 3,24,867 inmates. Further, as of June, 2024, 880 appeals \nof convicts have been filed in the Sessions Courts, 1,593 appeals \nin the High Courts and as on date (that is up to 04.09.2024), 1309 \nconvicts have been able to file special leave petitions in this Court.\n\nDigital Supreme Court Reports\f[2024] 10 S.C.R.  \n\n1785\n\nLegal Aid Defense Counsel System \n\n16.  A pioneering measure adopted by NALSA since the year 2021-22 is \nthe introduction of the Legal Aid Defense Counsel System with a view \nto strengthen and professionalize legal services delivered. At present, \nas per the report, around 611 of the 703 districts in the country have \nthe  Legal Aid  Defense  Counsel  System  in  place.  Just  as  there  is \na  prosecuting  office  for  the  prosecution,  this  is  an  institutionalized \nmethod of providing defense counsel assistance in legal aid matters. \nThe  Legal  Aid  Defense  Counsel  System  includes  dedicated,  \nfull-time experienced lawyers to represent the accused. The lawyers \nexclusively deal with criminal legal aid cases ensuring effective and \nefficient  representation,  timely  and  effective  client  consultations, \neffective monitoring of legal aid cases, professional management of \nlegal aid work in criminal matters and enhance responsiveness to the \nlitigant. The modified Legal Aid Defense Counsel System Scheme \nof 2022 provides for the selection process of the Legal Aid Defense \nCounsels (LADCs), the number of human resources to be engaged, \nthe  infrastructural  requirements,  essential  qualifications  and  the \nrole of legal services institutions. The objective of the scheme is to  \n(a) Provide qualitative and competent legal services in criminal matters \nto all eligible persons (b) To manage and implement legal aid system \nin a professional manner in criminal matters. As of 31.03.2024, the \nfollowing are the statistics with regard to the number of Chief Legal \nAid Counsels, number of Deputy Chief Legal Aid Counsels and the \nnumber of Assistant Legal Aid Counsels.\n\n“Till 31.03.2024, Office of LADC was set up in 611 districts across \nIndia.\n\nCategory of LADC\n\nHuman Resource\n\nNo. of Chief Legal Aid Counsels\n\nNo. of Deputy Chief Legal Aid Counsels\n\nNo. of Assistant Legal Aid Counsels\n\nTotal No. of Legal Aid Defence Counsels\n\nSpecial Campaign for Prisoners \n\n500\n\n713\n\n1193\n\n2406\n\n17.  The  report  indicates  that  NALSA  has  time  and  again  undertaken \nspecial  campaigns  for  prisoners  to  ensure  timely  access  after \n\nSuhas Chakma v. Union of India & Ors.\f1786 \n\n[2024] 10 S.C.R.\n\nrecognizing the unique challenges faced by the convicts in accessing \njustice. The objectives of the Campaign are to \n\n(a)  Secure appellate rights of the convicts; \n\n(b)  Ensuring that incarceration does not go beyond the period of \n\ntheir imprisonment or after remission; \n\n(c)  To secure parole/furlough and remission rights of the convicts. \nTo fully ensure the appellate rights of the convicts, NALSA with \nthe assistance of the DLSA, collects data of each of the convicts \nfrom (i) Jail authorities (ii) Courts (iii) High Court Legal Services \nCommittee (iv) Supreme Court Legal Services Committee. \n\nSteps  are  taken  to  ensure  the  communication  of  the  status  of  the \nappeal filed and the next date of hearing; follow up with regard to the \nfiling of appeals by the legal aid committee and the assigned counsel.\n\n18.  After collection of data, the following categorization is made:\n\n“• Convicts who are not willing to file appeals/SLPs.\n\n• Convicts who have already filed appeals/SLPs through \nprivate lawyers.\n\n• Convicts who have not at all filed appeals/SLPs but want \nto file appeal/SLPs through Legal Services Institutions.\n\n•  Convicts  who  have  sought  legal  aid  for  filing  appeals/\nSLPs but their appeals/SLPs have not been filed due to \nlack of documents or other reasons.\n\n• Convicts whose appeals/SLPs have been filed through \nlegal  services  authorities  but  they  are  not  aware  about \nthe name of their lawyers and the status of their appeals.\n\n• Convicts who have moved bail applications through Legal \nServices  Institutions  (LSIs)  but  are  not  aware  about  the \nstatus of applications.\n\n•  Convicts  who  want  to  get  their  matter  processed  for \nparole/furlough/remission  etc.  but  are  not  aware  of  the \nprocesses, and require drafting of applications for it.”\n\nAwareness\n\n19.  The  most  important  task  in  any  legal  service  is  spreading  of  its \nawareness to the needy. The status report of NALSA indicates that \n\nDigital Supreme Court Reports\f[2024] 10 S.C.R.  \n\n1787\n\nconvicts were made aware about the availability of free legal services, \navailability of the right to file Appeals/SLPs and the process of filing \nthe same. This guarantees and effectuates Article 21 inasmuch as \nfor the convict in custody too, who is virtually incommunicado with \nthe outside world, is positively made aware about his rights in the \nnature of the existence of a right of appeal and the facility available \nfor availing free legal services. This brings into full play Section 341 of \nthe Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, which reads as under:- \n\n341. Legal aid to accused at State expense in certain \ncases.– \n\n(1)  Where,  in  a  trial  or  appeal  before  a  Court,  the \naccused  is  not  represented  by  an  advocate,  and \nwhere it appears to the Court that the accused has \nnot  sufficient  means  to  engage  an  advocate,  the \nCourt  shall  assign  an  advocate  for  his  defence  at \nthe expense of the State. \n\n(2)  The  High  Court  may,  with  the  previous  approval  of \nthe  State  Government,  make  rules  providing  for—   \n(a)  the  mode  of  selecting  advocates  for  defence \nunder sub-section (1); (b) the facilities to be allowed \nto such advocates by the Courts; (c) the fees payable \nto such advocates by the Government, and generally, \nfor carrying out the purposes of sub-section (1). \n\n(3)  The  State  Government  may,  by  notification,  direct \nthat, as from such date as may be specified in the \nnotification,  the  provisions  of  sub-sections  (1)  and \n(2) shall apply in relation to any class of trials before \nother Courts in the State as they apply in relation to \ntrials before Courts of Session.” \n\nCompilation and Translation of Documents. \n\n20.  NALSA  report  states  that  steps  are  being  taken  to  ensure  that \nnecessary  documents  are  collected  along  with  the  custody \ncertificate and vakalatnama. Translation, interrogation through video \nconferencing and drafting of applications are also arranged by NALSA. \n\n21.  We  are  satisfied  that  insofar  as  provision  of  legal  services  are \nconcerned,  NALSA  with  the  effective  coordination  of  the  SLSAs \n\nSuhas Chakma v. Union of India & Ors.\f1788 \n\n[2024] 10 S.C.R.\n\nand DLSAs and assisting agencies are rendering yeomen service to \nrealize the constitutional goal of Article 39-A. They are also striving \nhard for the effective implementation of the provisions of the Legal \nServices Authorities Act, 1987. \n\nSOP- For (Under Trial Review Committees (UTRCs).\n\n22.  While  NALSA  SOP-2022  dealt  with  the  provisions  of  legal  aid \nservices to the prisoners, NALSA has a separate Standard Operating \nProcedure  for  the  smooth  functioning  of  the  Under  Trial  Review \nCommittees (UTRCs). This is to ensure that prisoners covered under \nthe following 14 categories, as directed by this Court, are released \nfrom jail without delay. The 14 categories of Undertrial Prisoners and \nthe directions are as under:-\n\n“3.3.1  In  case  UTPs  covered  under  Section  436A \nCr.P.C.:\n\nUTRC  may  recommend  to  concerned  trial  court  to  take \nup the matter and consider him/her for release on bail if \nthere are no special reasons to deny bail, with or without \nsureties.\n\n3.3.2 UTPs released on bail by the court, but have not \nbeen able to furnish sureties:\n\nThe UTRC may recommend the trial court to examine the \nreason why the accused is not furnishing surety/ bail bonds \nand if he/she is unable to do so due to poverty, then the \ntrial court may consider reducing the bail amount on the \napplication  of  the  lawyer  under  S.440,  CrPC  or  release \non personal bond.\n\n3.3.3 UTPs accused of compoundable offences:\n\nThe UTRC may recommend to the trial court to consider if \nthe offence can be compounded between the complainant \nand the accused as per law.\n\n3.3.4 UTPs eligible under Section 436 of Cr.P.C.:\n\nThe UTRC may recommend to the trial court to consider \nreleasing such an accused on personal bond in case he is \nunable to furnish bail bond within seven days of bail order.\n\nDigital Supreme Court Reports\f[2024] 10 S.C.R.  \n\n1789\n\n3.3.5  UTPs who may be covered under Section 3 of \nthe  Probation  of  Offenders  Act,  namely  accused  of \noffence  under  Sections  379,  380,  381,  404,  420  IPC \nor  alleged  to  be  an  offence  not  more  than  2  years \nimprisonment:\n\nThe UTRC may recommend to the trial court to consider \ninvoking of Probation of Offenders Act in fit cases as also \nplea bargaining in appropriate cases.\n\n3.3.6 Convicts who have undergone their sentence or \nare entitled to release because of remission granted \nto them:\n\nThe  UTRC  may  examine  the  reason  for  non-release  of \nthe  convict  and  the  Officer  in-charge  of  prison  may  be \nrecommended to look into the matter so that the convict \nis released as soon as possible.\n\n3.3.7  UTPs  become  eligible  to  be  released  on  bail \nunder Section 167(2)(a)(i) & (ii) of the Code read with \nSection 36A of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic \nSubstances  Act,  1985  (where  persons  accused  of \nSection 19 or Section 24 or Section 27A or for offences \ninvolving commercial quantity) and where investigation \nis not completed in 60/90/180 days:\n\nThe UTRC may recommend to the trial court to consider \nrelease of the accused in cases where chargesheet is not \nsubmitted within the statutory time frame.\n\n3.3.8  UTPs  who  are  imprisoned  for  offences  which \ncarry a maximum punishment of 2 years:\n\nThe UTRC may recommend to the trial court to consider \nreleasing of the UTP on bail in such cases.\n\n3.3.9  UTPs  who  are  detained  under  Chapter  VIII  of \nthe Cr.P.C. i.e. under Sections 107, 108, 109 and 151 \nof Cr.P.C.:\n\nThe  Executive  Magistrate/  District  Magistrate  court  may \nbe recommended to release/discharge such persons with \nor  without  conditions  or  to  make  an  order  reducing  the \n\nSuhas Chakma v. Union of India & Ors.\f1790 \n\n[2024] 10 S.C.R.\n\namount  of  the  security  or  the  number  of  sureties  or  the \ntime for which security has been required.\n\n3.3.10  UTPs  who  are  sick  or  infirm  and  require \nspecialized medical treatment:\n\nThe  UTRC  may  examine  the  medical  condition  of  the \ninmate and if it is found that the inmate is very sick and \nspecialized  treatment  is  essential  for  survival,  then  the \nUTRC may recommend the trial court to consider granting \nbail on medical ground, as provided under S.437, CrPC, \neven for temporary period.\n\n3.3.11 UTPs women offenders:\n\nWomen  under  trial  prisoners  who  are  not  accused  of \nserious  offences  may  be  considered  for  release  on \nbail  under  S.437,  CrPC,  especially  they  are  first  time \noffenders by the concerned trial courts. The UTRC may \nalso recommend suitable measures under the directions \nof the Hon’ble Court in R. D. Upadhyay vs State of A.P. \n& Ors. (AIR 2006 SC 1946).\n\n3.3.12 UTPs who are first time offenders between the \nages 19 and 21 years and in custody for the offence \npunishable with less than 7 years of imprisonment and \nhave suffered at least 1/4th of the maximum sentence \npossible:\n\nThe  UTRC  may  request  the  trial  court  to  consider \ngranting  bail  to  such  young  offenders.  If  the  person  is \nfound guilty in the course of trial, benefit of S.3 or S.4 \nof the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958, may be given \nto the accused.\n\n3.3.13  UTPs  who  are  of  unsound  mind  and  must  be \ndealt with Chapter XXV of the Code:\n\nUTRC may recommend the trial court to take appropriate \nsteps in accordance with Chapter XXV of the Code and \nprovide adequate treatment to such inmates.\n\n3.3.14 UTPs eligible for release under Section 437(6) of \nCr.P.C., wherein in a case triable by a Magistrate, the \n\nDigital Supreme Court Reports\f[2024] 10 S.C.R.  \n\n1791\n\ntrial of a person accused of any non-bailable offence \nhas  not  been  concluded  within  a  period  of  60  days \nfrom the first date fixed for taking evidence in the case: \n\nUTRC may request the trial court to consider granting bail \nto such UTPs under Section 437(6) of Cr.P.C.\n\n23.  The  Under Trial  Review  Committee  meetings  have  resulted  in  the \nrecommendation  for  release  of  3,13,888  prisoners  and  the  actual \nrelease of 1,52,570 prisoners across India. Acknowledging that there \ncould be unintended lapses in the identification of prisoners, NALSA \nhas  taken  corrective  steps.  NALSA  also  acknowledges  the  huge \ngap between the total number of persons identified and number of \npersons recommended for release and further the difference in the \nnumber of inmates recommended for release and the number of bail \napplications filed on their behalf. NALSA acknowledges that there has \nbeen continued detention of persons even when they are eligible for \nstatutory bail under Sections 436A, 436, 167(2) CrPC, the continued \ndetention of persons with mental illness despite statutory safeguards; \nthe continued arrest and detention of persons under offences carrying \nless  than  7  years  punishment  despite  the  directives  of  this  Court. \nLimited  use  of  liberal  bail  provisions  for  women  and  sick  or  infirm \npersons  are  some  of  the  reasons,  according  to  NALSA,  for  large \nnumber of persons continuing to remain behind bars. \n\nPre-Litigation Assistance\n\n24.  One of the important areas where legal aid, was in the initial days \nfound  wanting was in the pre litigation  arena. NALSA  has  risen to \nthe occasion by introducing “Early Access to Justice at Pre-Arrest, \nArrest and Remand Stage Framework”, under which all DLSAs upon \nreceiving the intimation of request of the suspect/arrestee to have \nfree legal assistance during interrogation, shall inform the deputed \nlawyer as per the duty roster. The assigned lawyer is to then to go \nto the concerned Police Station to provide legal assistance to such \npersons.  Specific  duties  have  been  cast  on  legal  aid  lawyers  to \nchallenge the arrests made in violation of the statutory framework or \nbinding precedents; to move bail application expeditiously and keep \nthe client informed about their status. More importantly, the legal aid \nlawyers have been asked to move applications, wherever necessary, \nfor modification of bail conditions such as suretyship amount. \n\nSuhas Chakma v. Union of India & Ors.\f1792 \n\n[2024] 10 S.C.R.\n\n25. \n\nIn a recent case, this Court in Girish Gandhi vs. State of UP, 2024 \nSCC  OnLine  SC  2142  had  the  following  to  say  on  how  excessive \nbail conditions virtually defeats the bail:-\n\n23. From time immemorial, the principle has been that the \nexcessive  bail  is  no  bail.  To  grant  bail  and  thereafter  to \nimpose excessive and onerous conditions, is to take away \nwith the left hand, what is given with the right. As to what \nis excessive will depend on the facts and circumstances \nof  each  case.  In  the  present  case,  the  petitioner  is \nexperiencing a genuine difficulty in finding multiple sureties. \nSureties  are  essential  to  ensure  the  presence  of  the \naccused,  released  on  bail. At  the  same  time,  where  the \ncourt is faced with the situation where the accused enlarged \non bail is unable to find sureties, as ordered, in multiple \ncases, there is also a need to balance the requirement of \nfurnishing the sureties with his or her fundamental rights \nunder Article  21  of  the  Constitution  of  India. An  order \nwhich would protect the person’s fundamental right under \nArticle 21 and at the same time guarantee the presence, \nwould be reasonable and proportionate. As to what such \nan  order  should  be,  will  again  depend  on  the  facts  and \ncircumstances of each case. 24. In Satender Kumar Antil \nv. Central Bureau of Investigation (2022) 10 SCC 51, this \nCourt held that “imposing a condition which is impossible of \ncompliance would be defeating the very object of release.”\n\n26.  NALSA Lawyers step in to obtain translated copies of documents \nwherever necessary; ensure that in case of a foreign national, the \nconcerned High Commission is informed and also make submissions \nif  the  suspect/arrestee  appears  to  be  a  child/juvenile.  Statistics \nreveal that as of June, 2024, 17,894 suspects have been given legal \nassistance  at  the  pre  arrest  stage  at  the  Police  Station.  Of  them, \n7,466  were  not  arrested.  It  is  set  out  that  13,747  accused  were \nprovided assistance at the Police Station before producing them in \nCourts, 94,875 at the remand stage, 37,929 bail applications were \nfiled  at  the  remand  stage  in  which  20182  accused  were  granted \nbail. While we commend NALSA for the steps taken, we also direct \nthat they continue to keep up the momentum and plug the gaps, if \nany, which they themselves have fairly identified and placed before \nthe Court. \n\nDigital Supreme Court Reports\f[2024] 10 S.C.R.  \n\n1793\n\nE-Prison Module / E-kiosks in Prisons\n\n27.  NALSA has also stated that E-Prison Module for effective monitoring of \ncases has been implemented and under the modified E-Prison Module \ndata regarding orders granting bail, the status of implementation of \norders granting bail and orders of acquittal are uploaded. Similarly, \nNALSA has prepared a module called “Inmates Information Access \nto Relatives” - whereby the inmates and/or their relatives are able \nto  access  details  relating  to  the  prisoners.  The  prisoner  and  the \nnominated relatives can access the details through E-Kiosks installed \ninside the jails. Through these E-Kiosks, the prisoner/relatives can \ncheck the next hearing date, remission period, parole and furlough \napplication status etc. \n\n28. \n\nIn  an  order  passed  as  a  chamber  judge  (one  of  us),  Viswanathan \nK.V. J. in Sanjit Saha vs. State of West Bengal, 2023 INSC 1085 \nmade the following suggestion so that the data from prison is available \non a click of a button to courts including this Court. The said Para \nis extracted hereinbelow.\n\n“30.  The  long-term  option  would  be  in  the  digital  era  to \nevolve  a  mechanism  whereby,  the  Jail  authorities  are \nvested  with  an  obligation  to  upload  on  a  customised \nweb  portal,  the  surrender  and  custody  particulars  of  the \nconvicts with the corresponding numbers of the Criminal \nAppeals/Special Leave Petitions. This will ensure that on \na click of a button, all up to date information are available \nfor the Court.”\n\n29.  NALSA, SLSAs and DLSAs can all help the prison authorities and \nthe Courts by acting as a bridge in ensuring that the data is fed and \nmade available to the Court. \n\nSteps taken pursuant to the order of this Court on 09.05.2024 \nand 17.05.2024\n\n30.  Acting on the communication of NALSA and based on the convict \ninformation sheet received from the JVLs, SLSAs have sent their first \nquarterly report to NALSA. The following tables have been placed \nby NALSA in the report dated 06.09.2024.\n\nThe data regarding the legal services provided to prisoners at these \nPLACs over the years is as under:\n\nSuhas Chakma v. Union of India & Ors.\f1794 \n\n[2024] 10 S.C.R.\n\nYears\n\n2019-20 2020-21 2021-22 2022-23 2023-24\n\nNo. of Prison \nLegal Services \nClinics\nNo. of inmates \ninteracted with\n\nNo. of inmates \nprovided legal \nassistance\n\n1111\n\n1076\n\n1181\n\n1177\n\n1256\n\n369698\n\n162670\n\n259339\n\n350265 456798\n\n297708\n\n143037\n\n218501\n\n264593 324867\n\nThe data regarding the legal services provided to convicts for filing \nappeals is as under:\n\nYears No. of convicts \nwhose appeals \nwere filed in the \nSession’s Court\n\n2021\n\n2022\n\n2023\n\n2024\n\n1283\n\n2101\n\n3504\n\nNumber of convicts \nwhose papers/\napplications were \nsent to the High \nCourts by DLSA’s for \nfiling appeals\n3181\n\nNumber of \nconvicts on \nwhose behalf \nSLPs were filed \nthrough SCLSC \n(all SLPs)\n810\n\n4115\n\n4716\n\n1153\n\n1262\n\n880 (from \n01.01.2024 till \n31.08.2024)\n\n1593 (from \n01.01.2024 till \n31.08.2024)\n\n1309 (from \n01.01.2024 till \n04.09.2024)\n\nThe  State-wise  breakup  of  total  convicts  and  convicts  who  filed \nappeals are as follows. Mr. Vijay Hansaria, learned Amicus Curiae \nhas  made  the  analysis  and  after  adding  two  columns  to  the  chart \nfiled by NALSA, has placed the following before us:-\n\nState\n\nTotal \nConvicts\n\nAppeals\n\nAppeals \nnot filed\n\nAndhra \nPradesh\n\nArunachal \nPradesh\nAssam\n\n1751\n\n1415\n\n62\n\n6\n\n2180\n\n2021\n\n336\n\n56\n\n159\n\nPercent of \nappeals not \nfiled\n\n19%\n\n90%\n\n7%\n\nDigital Supreme Court Reports\f[2024] 10 S.C.R.  \n\n1795\n\nDadra & \nNagar Haveli\nDaman Diu\nChhattisgarh\nGoa\nJammu and \nKashmir\nJharkhand\nKerala\nLakshadweep\nManipur\nMeghalaya\nRajasthan\nPondicherry\nPunjab\nTelangana\nUttarakhand\nWest Bengal\nChandigarh\nGujarat\nHimachal\nMadhya \nPradesh\nTripura\nUttar Pradesh\nKarnataka\nMizoram\nMaharashtra\nLadakh\nBihar\nOrissa\nTamil Nadu\nNagaland\nHaryana\nSikkim\nTotal\n\n0\n\n0\n306\n52\n131\n\n2942\n596\n0\n78\n308\n1890\n102\n3159\n297\n1701\n2454\n306\n2740\n869\n16813\n\n285\n12858\n2071\n50\n2580\n4\n4382\n3048\n2829\n42\n4366\nNA\n71,252\n\n280\n48\n118\n\n2651\n532\n\n37\n150\n1842\n9\n2591\n243\n1683\n1561\n280\n1937\n663\n16149\n\n213\n11870\n1389\n27\n1739\n3\n4048\n2820\n2197\n14\n3600\nNA\n62,136\n\n26\n4\n13\n\n291\n64\n\n41\n158\n48\n93\n568\n54\n18\n893\n26\n803\n206\n664\n\n72\n988\n682\n23\n841\n1\n334\n156\n632\n28\n766\n\n9,044\n\n8%\n2%\n10%\n\n10%\n11%\n\n53%\n51%\n3%\n91%\n18%\n18%\n1%\n36%\n8%\n29%\n24%\n4%\n\n25%\n8%\n33%\n46%\n33%\n25%\n8%\n5%\n22%\n67%\n18%\n\nSuhas Chakma v. Union of India & Ors.\f1796 \n\n[2024] 10 S.C.R.\n\nIt has also been mentioned that insofar as the Union Territory of Dadra \nand Nagar Haveli is concerned, there was only one sub-jail where \nall the prisoners were undertrials. The convicts of the Union Territory \nhave  been  sent  to  the  Central  Jail  of  nearby  districts  in  Gujarat. \nInsofar  as  the  Union  Territory  of  Daman  and  Diu  was  concerned, \nthe figure was Nil. In the Union Territory of Lakshadweep, no convict \nwas lodged in its jail as all convicts are transferred to a jail in Kerala, \npost-conviction. In Sikkim, the data is still awaited.\n\n31.  The  learned Amicus  has  also  drawn  the  attention  of  this  Court  to \nthe judgment of Justice Ajay Bhanot of the Allahabad High Court in \nRamu v. State of U.P., 2024 SCC OnLine All 4618. Learned Amicus \nprays that the appeal of the 870 convicts who had expressed their \nwillingness to file appeals, as recorded in the order of 15.07.2024, \nbe filed within 4 weeks, if not already filed, and an updated status \nreport  be  filed  by  NALSA  giving  details  of  the  convicts  who  have \nconsented to file the appeals through legal aid. Apart from the above, \nlearned Amicus had  also prayed for a direction that the judgment \nin Ramu (Supra) be made applicable to all States throughout the \ncountry. \n\nReasons given by convicts for not filing appeals \n\n32.  NALSA in its report of 06.09.2024 has opined that the convicts who \nhave not preferred an appeal had adduced the following reasons:- \n\n\"i.  Convicts were not interested in preferring an appeal \nas they were satisfied with the current judgment and \norder on sentence;\n\nii.  Convicts  had  served  a  substantial  part  of  their \n\nsentence;\n\niii.  Convicts’ appeal was rejected by the High Court and \nhence, they didn’t want to file an appeal before the \nSupreme Court;\n\niv.  Convicts lacked the financial resources to prefer an \n\nappeal;\n\nv.  Convicts  wanted  to  consult  their  families  before \n\ndeciding whether or not to prefer an appeal;\n\nvi.  Convicts wanted to engage a private counsel;\n\nDigital Supreme Court Reports\f[2024] 10 S.C.R.  \n\n1797\n\nvii.  Convicts had a fear of enhancement of sentence in \n\nthe Appellate proceedings;\n\nviii.  Convicts had originally pleaded guilty to the offence \n\nand were hence, not inclined to prefer an appeal;\n\nix.  Convicts had multiple cases pending against them;\n\nX.  Convicts were not willing to state any specific reason \n\nfor not preferring an appeal; and\n\nxi.  Convicts had been recently convicted.”\n\nNALSA  has  stated  that  regular  interaction  is  on  with  the  convicts \nwho have not preferred the appeals and they have been informed \nof  the  availability  of  free  legal  aid  and  the  convicts  falling  in  the \ncategories (i), (x), (xi) are regularly interacting with the JVLs about \ntheir  rights.  The  DLSAs  are  also  conducting  monthly  inspections \nof the PLACs. Periodical reports of the DLSAs are to be submitted \nto  the  SLSAs,  and  the  SLSAs  are  periodically  sending  reports  to \nNALSA. The concern of Mr. Vijay Hansaria, learned Amicus Curie, \nis duly addressed by NALSA. \n\nAS WAS SAID:- “LEGAL AID TO POOR SHOULD NOT BE POOR \nLEGAL AID”.\n\n33.  This Court in Ramanand @ Nandlal Bharti v. State of U.P., 2022 \nSCC  Online  SC  1396,  while  discussing  the  quality  of  legal  aid,  in \npara 120, held as under:\n\n“120.  It  is  by  far  now  well-settled  for  a  legal  proposition \nthat it is the duty of the court to see and ensure that an \naccused put on a criminal trial is effectively represented \nby  a  defence  counsel,  and  in  the  event  on  account  of \nindigence,  poverty  or  illiteracy  or  any  other  disabling \nfactor, he is not able to engage a counsel of his choice, it \nbecomes the duty of the court to provide him appropriate \nand  meaningful  legal  aid  at  the  State  expense.  What  is \nmeant by the duty of the State to ensure a fair defence to \nan accused is not the employment of a defence counsel \nfor  namesake.  It  has  to  be  the  provision  of  a  counsel \nwho  defends  the  accused  diligently  to  the  best  of  his \nabilities.  While  the  quality  of  the  defence  or  the  caliber \n\nSuhas Chakma v. Union of India & Ors.\f1798 \n\n[2024] 10 S.C.R.\n\nof  the  counsel  would  not  militate  against  the  guarantee \nto  a  fair  trial  sanctioned  by Articles  21  and  22  resply  of \nthe  Constitution,  a  threshold  level  of  competence  and \ndue diligence in the discharge of his duties as a defence \ncounsel would certainly be the constitutional guaranteed \nexpectation.  The  presence  of  counsel  on  record  means \neffective,  genuine  and  faithful  presence  and  not  a  mere \nfarcical, sham or a virtual presence that is illusory, if not \nfraudulent.”\n\nDirections: -\n\n34. \n\nIn view of the above, we dispose of the matter by issuing the following \ndirections:- \n\ni.  While commending the work already done by NALSA, the SLSAs \nand  the  DLSAs,  we  have  no  reason  to  doubt  that  the  Legal \nServices Authorities at different levels will continue to work with \nthe  same  momentum  to  achieve  the  constitutional  objectives \nand objectives of the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987.\n\nii.  NALSA in cooperation with the SLSAs and the DLSAs will ensure \nthat the SOP on Access to Legal Aid Services to prisoners and \nfunctioning of PLACs are operated efficiently in practice. NALSA \nwill periodically update and improve the measures prescribed \nunder the SOP-2022 so as to address any of the inadequacies \nthat may emerge while operating the same at the field level.\n\niii.  The  Legal  Services Authorities  at  different  levels  will  adopt \nmethods to strengthen the monitoring of PLACs and to review \ntheir functioning periodically.\n\niv.  The  Legal  Services  Authorities  will  periodically  update  the \nstatistical  data  and  after  analysing  the  results  take  steps  to \naddress the shortcomings that may come to light.\n\nv. \n\nThe Legal Services Authorities, at all levels, should ensure that \nthe Legal Aid Defence Counsel System, which is a pioneering \nmeasure, functions to its full potential. In this regard, periodic \ninspection  and  audit  of  the  work  of  the  Legal  Aid  Defence \nCounsels  should  be  carried  out.  Steps  should  also  be  taken \nto  improve  the  service  conditions  of  the  personnel  working \n\nDigital Supreme Court Reports\f[2024] 10 S.C.R.  \n\n1799\n\nin  the  Legal Aid  Defence  Counsel  system,  whenever  it  is  felt \nnecessary and appropriate.\n\nvi.  For the success of the functioning of the legal aid mechanism, \nawareness  is  the  key.  A  robust  mechanism  should  be  put \nin  place  and  periodically  updated  to  ensure  that  the  various \nbeneficial schemes promoted by the Legal Services Authorities \nreaches the nook and corner of the nation and particularly, to \nthose  whose  grievances  it  has  set  out  to  address. Adequate \nliterature  including  in  the  local  languages  in  the  States  and \nappropriate promotional methods should be launched so that \nthe  consumers  of  justice  to  whom  the  schemes  are  intended \ncan make best use of the same.\n\nvii. \n\nIn  this  regard,  inter  alia,  the  following  measures  to  create \nawareness could be undertaken through the length and breadth \nof the nation to spread the message of the availability of legal aid:\n\n(a) \n\nIn  public  places  like  police  stations,  post  offices,  bus \nstands,  railway  stations  etc.  boards  in  prominent  places \nbe  displayed  furnishing  the  address  for  contact  and  the \nphone numbers of the nearest legal aid office. This should \nbe done in the local language and in English. \n\n(b)  Promotional campaigns in the local language be undertaken \nthrough Radio/All India Radio/Doordarshan. This will be in \naddition to the promotional measures undertaken through \nthe  digitalization  process  –  like  hosting  of  websites  and \nprominent  mention  thereon  on  the  landing  page  of  the \nlegal services authority wherever permissible. \n\n(c)  To create complete awareness about the existence of legal \naid  schemes,  promotional  campaigns  may  include  such \nother  creative  measures  including  organization  of  street \ncorner plays (nukkad natak) in rural areas so that the poor \nrural  masses  comprehend  the  facility  available  to  them \nthrough the legal aid scheme. These should be undertaken \nwithout dislocating the normal life of citizens. Further, these \nmeasures will not only create awareness about legal aid to \nthe accused but will also create awareness for the victims \nand for those whose civil rights have been infringed. \n\nSuhas Chakma v. Union of India & Ors.\f1800 \n\n[2024] 10 S.C.R.\n\nviii.  The  Legal  Services  Authorities  will  periodically  review  and \nupdate SOP-2022 for the Undertrial Review Committee [UTRC].\n\nix.  The  huge  gap  between  total  number  of  persons  identified  by \nthe UTRC and the number of persons recommended for release \nshould  be  looked  into  and  adequate  corrective  measures  be \ntaken. Similarly, the difference between the number of prisoners/\ninmates  recommended  for  release  and  the  number  of  bail \napplications filed should be particularly looked into by NALSA/\nSLSAs/DLSAs and adequate corrective measures taken.\n\nx. \n\nxi. \n\nThe “Early Access to Justice at Pre-arrest, Arrest and Remand \nStage  Framework”  established  by  NALSA  for  pre-litigation \nassistance should be diligently pursued and the work undertaken \nunder the framework be periodically reviewed.\n\nInteraction by the Legal Service Authorities at different levels with \nconvicts who had not preferred appeals should be periodically \nundertaken and the convicts be informed of their right to free \nlegal aid.\n\nxii.  Periodic  interaction  should  be  held  with  Jail  Visiting  Lawyers \n(JVLs)  and  Para  Legal  Volunteers  (PLVs).  This  is  to  ensure \nupdation  of  their  knowledge  so  that  the  system  functions \nefficiently as a whole.\n\nxiii.  Steps for continuing education of lawyers involved in pre-litigation \nassistance  and  those  associated  with  the  Legal Aid  Defence \nCounsel set-up should be provided by Legal Services Authorities. \nApart  from  this,  it  should  also  be  ensured  that  adequate  law \nbooks  and  access  to  online  libraries  are  available  to  lawyers \nengaged at the pre-litigation assistance stage and those involved \nwith the Legal Defence Counsel set-up.\n\nxiv.  Periodic reports should be submitted by the DLSAs to the SLSAs \nand  the  SLSAs  to  the  NALSA,  if  not  already  done.  NALSA \nshould digitise the whole process whereby at the central level \nNALSA can, on the click of a button, get details of the updates \ndone by SLSAs and DLSAs on regular basis.\n\nxv.  The Union of India and the State Governments shall continue to \nextend their cooperation and assistance to the Legal Services \nAuthorities  at  different  levels  for  the  effective  implementation \nof the measures taken by them.\n\nDigital Supreme Court Reports\f[2024] 10 S.C.R.  \n\n1801\n\nxvi.  We direct the Registry to forward a copy of this judgment to all \nthe High Courts in the country. The High Courts may consider \nthe feasibility of issuing a practice direction to the effect that all \ncourts including the High Court while furnishing the copy of the \njudgment of conviction/dismissal/reversal of acquittal/dismissal \nof bail applications, may append a coversheet to the judgment \ninforming  the  convict  about  the  availability  of  free  legal  aid \nfacilities  for  pursuing  higher  remedies.  The  coversheet  may \nset  out  the  contact  address  and  phone  number  of  the  legal \naid  committee  attached  to  the  court  for  seeking  appropriate \nguidance.  Similar  information  may  be  made  available  in  the \nnotices  issued  to  the  respondents  by  the  concerned  courts \nin  appeals  against  acquittal.  The  High  Courts  may  on  their \nwebpage carry information about the legal aid facilities available \nin the State. \n\n35.  We place on record our appreciation for the assistance rendered by \n\nMr. Vijay Hansaria, learned Amicus Curiae.\n\n36.  We also place on record our appreciation for Ms. Rashmi Nandakumar, \nlearned counsel for her effective presentation of the case before this \nCourt  and  for  filing  detailed  written  submissions  with  the  relevant \ndata. We grant liberty to NALSA to move appropriate applications in \nthis matter in case any further directions are required in furtherance \nof the goals and objectives set out hereinabove. \n\nResult of the case: Directions issued.\n\n†Headnotes prepared by: Divya Pandey\n\nSuhas Chakma v. Union of India & Ors.\f"}