All Prisoners Need To Be Given Nutritious Food, Cannot Make Distinction Between Actor Darshan And Other Undertrials: Karnataka High Court

A single judge bench of Justice M Nagaprasanna made the observation while hearing a petition filed by Kannada actor Darshan Thoogudeepa who has challenged an order of the Magistrate courtrejecting his application seeking home-cooked food and bedding and cutlery in prison.

Senior Advocate Prabhuling K Navadgi appearing for the petitioner relying on the medical certificate issued said the petitioner requires nutritional food.

To this, the court said “If he needs a special diet, if his health is deteriorating the doctors will provide. It is not about Darshan or anyone else. Every citizen or undertrial prisoner will ask why anybody should be denied nutritious food. How can we make a distinction? Other undertrial prisoners are also citizens.”

It added “Requirements as per the doctor will be provided. Be it you or anyone else...Merely because a celebrity is in prison. You may be an accused/undertrial prisoner but there are scores of prisoners who may require a better diet.”

Navadgi then argued that the magistrate court was erroneous as it had considered Rule 728 of the Karnataka Prisons and Correctional Services Manual, 2021 Prison Manual which is an executive instruction for proper conduct inside prisons and it cannot run contrary to the Prison Act and Section 30 of the Act which provides for home cooked food to an undertrial prisoner subject to approval from authorities.

However, the court said that Section 30 of the Act only prescribes the procedure, but how it is to be regulated is under the Prison Manual by way of guidelines, which was a statutorily accepted principle.

Navadgi then submitted that a request had been made to the authorities to consider providing him with home-cooked food among other amenities.

The Special Public Prosecutor informed the court that two representations were made to the authorities and if two weeks is given then it would be considered and appropriate orders would be passed. Navadgi said the representation should be considered objectively in consultation with the medical officer.

Following this the court directed respondents to consider the representation in accordance with law and place it before the court on the next date, August 20. The court also said that the issue projected needs an answer and therefore the matter would be kept pending till the authorities consider the same.

Case Title: DARSHAN THOOGUDEEPA SRINIVAS AND State of Karnataka & Others

Case No: WP 20514/2024

Appearance: Senior Advocate Prabhuling K Navadgi for Petitioner.