New Delhi: As more and more prisoners are set to apply for interim bail, citing the Supreme Court's criteria for decongesting jails amid the pandemic, the Delhi Police has now directed its Deputy Commissioners of Police to specifically go through the directions issued by the headquarters regarding the release of prisoners and undertrials given the COVID-19 pandemic very carefully.
"Every single detail about the criminals and history of their case documents should be brief and sensitised to investigating officers, SHOs, ACPs so that they can strongly oppose the bail of criminals, UTPs who are not entitled with sufficient documents and evidence in the Court," DCPs were directed.
When asked about the data related to the release of inmates, a prison official said the jail population had reduced by around 4,000 since the beginning of April. At that time, the prison population was over 20,000 (Capacity is just 10,000).
But when the decongestion exercise started on May 11, the jail population was approximately 19,500. "So from that date, around 3,000 have been released on bail. But among those released, some are regular bail cases also. Now the total population is approximately 16,400," an official said on Monday.
Meanwhile, DCPs were also asked to strictly follow directions issued by the Supreme Court of India in the case of Arnesh Kumar Vs the state of Bihar related to arrests and detentions.
An order containing the guidelines as per the SC judgment was sent to DCPs and units. "All the State Governments to instruct its police officers not to automatically arrest when a case under Section 498-A of the IPC is registered but to satisfy themselves about the necessity for arrest under the parameters laid down above flowing from Section 41, Cr.PC," the order read.
The order further read the decision not to arrest an accused, be forwarded to the Magistrate within two weeks from the date of the institution of the case with a copy to the Magistrate which may be extended by the Superintendent of police of the district for the reasons to be recorded in writing.
"Authorising detention without recording reasons as aforesaid by the judicial Magistrate concerned shall be liable for departmental action by the appropriate High Court," the order read.
As per the order, we hasten to add that the directions aforesaid shall not only apply to the cases under Section 498-A of the I.P.C. or Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, the case in hand, but also such cases where the offence is punishable with imprisonment of a term which may be less than seven years or which may extend to seven years.
The Commissioner of Police later directed that this order be circulated to all concerned for strict compliance and sensitization.