Listen To This Post
Chandigarh: Raising serious concerns about the prison administration, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has questioned how an accused, while in custody, could allegedly remain in contact with co-accused through a mobile phone, observing that such a situation points to either false allegations or a grave lapse on the part of Vashisth said the issue goes beyond an individual case and reflects systemic concerns affecting prison discipline and public order.
“Either false allegation or serious lapse”
The Court made a sharp observation, stating: “Either the allegations are false, or there has been some form of connivance or negligence on the part of the jail authorities in facilitating access to a mobile phone.”
The Bench underlined that such incidents are “wholly unacceptable” and not expected in a controlled custodial environment, where strict surveillance mechanisms are meant to prevent any unauthorised communication.
State asked to introspect, plug gaps.
Flagging the gravity of the issue, the Court directed the Haryana government to undertake serious introspection, particularly through its Home Department, to prevent recurrence of such lapses.
It noted that if inmates can access communication devices inside jail, it could:
- Undermine law enforcement and investigations
- Enable coordination with co-accused
- Threaten public order and trial integrity
The observations effectively place the responsibility on the State to examine whether the lapse — if proven — stems from administrative negligence or possible collusion within the prison system.
Bail granted, but concerns remain
Despite the strong remarks, the Court granted bail to the petitioner, clarifying that its observations were not a comment on the merits of the case. The accused was directed to be released upon furnishing the required bonds before the trial court.
The case pertains to an FIR registered in May 2022 under the provisions of the NDPS Act and Section 201 of the NDPS Act in Fatehabad district.
Background: Criminal antecedents and unusual claim
During the hearing, the Court was informed that the petitioner had been involved in around 54 criminal cases, with convictions in about 13. However, in only one case under the NDPS Act was a conviction recorded; in the other cases, the law had either acquitted, led to a confession of guilt, or resulted in the completion of the sentence.
What surprised the Court was the claim that the accused, despite being in custody, was in contact with co-accused via a mobile phone — a fact that allegedly escaped the notice of jail authorities.
Larger message on prison accountability
The High Court’s remarks send a strong signal on accountability within correctional institutions, stressing that even isolated incidents of unauthorised access can point to deeper structural flaws.
By calling for introspection, the Court has effectively pushed the State to audit its prison systems, strengthen monitoring, and ensure zero tolerance for lapses, reinforcing the principle that custody must remain secure, transparent and beyond suspicion.
