https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=175831 Section 30 of the Prisons Act, 1894 was read down to permit only regulated separation for safe custody of a prisoner under sentence of death, not solitary confinement; punitive isolation was treated as impermissible unless justified by exceptional reasons and fair procedure. Section 56 was upheld only as a narrow security power: prolonged bar fetters could be imposed solely where necessity, escape risk, contemporaneous reasons, and review supported the restraint, with use limited to the shortest possible duration. The prison regime was required to conform to Articles 14, 19, and 21 by excluding arbitrary, routine, or excessively prolonged custody measures. The petitions failed because the provisions were saved by interpretation rather than struck down. en-us Wed, 30 Aug 1978 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 05 Dec 2015 17:16:21 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=175831 Section 30 of the Prisons Act, 1894 was read down to permit only regulated separation for safe custody of a prisoner under sentence of death, not solitary confinement; punitive isolation was treated as impermissible unless justified by exceptional reasons and fair procedure. Section 56 was upheld only as a narrow security power: prolonged bar fetters could be imposed solely where necessity, escape risk, contemporaneous reasons, and review supported the restraint, with use limited to the shortest possible duration. The prison regime was required to conform to Articles 14, 19, and 21 by excluding arbitrary, routine, or excessively prolonged custody measures. The petitions failed because the provisions were saved by interpretation rather than struck down. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 30 Aug 1978 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=175831