Advocate Moves Madras High Court To Allow Lawyers To Personally Meet And Consult Clients In Prison
A plea has been filed in the Madras High Court challenging the recent practice in Puzhal prison where the authorities were not allowing lawyers to directly meet their clients. The prison department had introduced a telecom system through which the accused and the lawyers could talk sitting across a barricade board.The bench of Justice SM Subramaniam and Justice V Sivagnanam was hearing a...
A plea has been filed in the Madras High Court challenging the recent practice in Puzhal prison where the authorities were not allowing lawyers to directly meet their clients. The prison department had introduced a telecom system through which the accused and the lawyers could talk sitting across a barricade board.
The bench of Justice SM Subramaniam and Justice V Sivagnanam was hearing a plea filed by Ananda Kumar, an advocate practicing in the Madras High Court.
Kumar submitted that the prison department had not allowed him to meet his clients in the prison directly, and they had set up telephones in one room and barricade board in another room. He informed the court that the prison department had imposed an online booking procedure to meet the accused and even after finishing the formal online reservation, it had become difficult to meet the accused.
Kumar had also submitted that with the restrictions imposed by the prison authorities, the advocates were finding it difficult to meet their clients and unable to consult their clients or inform the court proceedings. He added that every advocate had a right to visit their clients and every advocate should have a right to discuss with their clients. Thus, he requested the court to allow advocates to personally meet the prisoners as per the previous rules in central prison.
When the case was taken up for hearing, the lawyers informed the court that a time slot was being allotted only to meet one prisoner and hence the lawyers were unable to meet multiple prisoners for whom they filed Vakalat in the courts.
The Additional Public Prosecutor informed the court that some of the issues had already been resolved and other issues were being considered. The APP also assured the court that the telecom setups would be removed from the prison and the State would also work on improving other facilities.
The court took note of the submissions and also asked the state to consider providing toilets for women lawyers and men lawyers, seating arrangements for the lawyers who all are waiting at the hall, a locker facility, and other infrastructural facilities required for the purpose of facilitating the lawyers and prisoners to communicate each other.
The state informed the court that it would consider the aspects and file an undertaking in this regard. The court then adjourned the case to October 15.
Advocate Kasirajan appeared for the petitioner.
Case Title: P Ananda Kumar v The Director General of Police (Prison) and Others
Case No: WP 28839 of 2024