The Punjab and Haryana High Court recently ordered that arrangements be made to enable a final year LLM student (petitioner) imprisoned on murder charges to appear for his second-semester examination [Prabal Titus V. State of Punjab and Others]..Justice Vikas Bahl reasoned that if the petitioner is not permitted to appear for his examination, he would not be able to complete his course, which would jeopardize his career."In case the petitioner is not permitted to give the said exams, then, the same would cause irreparable loss to the petitioner, inasmuch as, he will not be able to complete his LLM (Corporate Laws) and the same would jeopardize his future, therefore, the present petition is allowed," the Court said.The Court also noted that the petitioner was a meritorious student, being an LLB graduate with an 8.01 out of 10 CGPA who had done 25 online courses from various foreign universities. .The petitioner had approached the High Court challenging a lower court order denying him permission to appear for his exam.The lower court had denied permission on the ground that the petitioner had not been able to produce any 'admit card' issued by his university which would confirm that the petitioner was qualified to appear for exams.Before the High Court, the petitioner argued that he had been falsely implicated in the murder case. He urged for permission to attend his LLM exam by arguing that his right to life included his right to an education. Meanwhile, the university clarified that it does not issue any separate admit card for appearing in examinations and that the student can appear in the examination by just showing the student ID card, which had already been issued to the petitioner. The counsel for the petitioner argued that the petitioner had also moved an application before the jail authorities for permission to write the exam. However, the district jail superintendent declined to grant permission after noting that the jail manual only permits the petitioner to be provided with the facilities for continuing studies inside the jail premises. The authority replied that the jail superintendent on his own could not send the applicant outside the jail for his examination. The superintendent said that the Court's intervention was required to issue appropriate directions in this regard..The State contended that since the petitioner was booked in a murder case, the exam could be written by the petitioner while remaining in police custody if at all his request to take the exam is allowed. The State added that the petitioner should bear the expenses for setting up arrangements to write the exam while remaining in policy custody. .The Court, however, allowed the petitioner to take his exams at the University. The Court also ordered the State to deploy adequate police personnel as security to take the petitioner to the exam hall and ensure his return to jail after the exam. To this end, the Court issued the following directions:1. Petitioner would deposit an amount of ₹75,000, as per the directions of the State;2. State would depute an adequate number of police personnel to take the petitioner from jail to the examination centre on the days on which the four exams are to be held.3. After each exam is over, the police personnel, who have been deputed by the State would take the petitioner back to the jail.4. The university is directed to permit the petitioner to take the said four exams on the petitioner showing his identity card.5. The university is further directed to ensure that the police personnel accompanying the petitioner are allowed to sit in a place where the petitioner is visible to them throughout the examination. The concerned police personnel are directed to keep a strict vigil on the petitioner so that the petitioner does not escape..Advocate Kanwalvir Singh Kang appeared for the petitioner. Senior Deputy Attorney General of Punjab NS Diwana represented the State. Advocate Deepak Singh Saini represented the university..[Read Order]
The Punjab and Haryana High Court recently ordered that arrangements be made to enable a final year LLM student (petitioner) imprisoned on murder charges to appear for his second-semester examination [Prabal Titus V. State of Punjab and Others]..Justice Vikas Bahl reasoned that if the petitioner is not permitted to appear for his examination, he would not be able to complete his course, which would jeopardize his career."In case the petitioner is not permitted to give the said exams, then, the same would cause irreparable loss to the petitioner, inasmuch as, he will not be able to complete his LLM (Corporate Laws) and the same would jeopardize his future, therefore, the present petition is allowed," the Court said.The Court also noted that the petitioner was a meritorious student, being an LLB graduate with an 8.01 out of 10 CGPA who had done 25 online courses from various foreign universities. .The petitioner had approached the High Court challenging a lower court order denying him permission to appear for his exam.The lower court had denied permission on the ground that the petitioner had not been able to produce any 'admit card' issued by his university which would confirm that the petitioner was qualified to appear for exams.Before the High Court, the petitioner argued that he had been falsely implicated in the murder case. He urged for permission to attend his LLM exam by arguing that his right to life included his right to an education. Meanwhile, the university clarified that it does not issue any separate admit card for appearing in examinations and that the student can appear in the examination by just showing the student ID card, which had already been issued to the petitioner. The counsel for the petitioner argued that the petitioner had also moved an application before the jail authorities for permission to write the exam. However, the district jail superintendent declined to grant permission after noting that the jail manual only permits the petitioner to be provided with the facilities for continuing studies inside the jail premises. The authority replied that the jail superintendent on his own could not send the applicant outside the jail for his examination. The superintendent said that the Court's intervention was required to issue appropriate directions in this regard..The State contended that since the petitioner was booked in a murder case, the exam could be written by the petitioner while remaining in police custody if at all his request to take the exam is allowed. The State added that the petitioner should bear the expenses for setting up arrangements to write the exam while remaining in policy custody. .The Court, however, allowed the petitioner to take his exams at the University. The Court also ordered the State to deploy adequate police personnel as security to take the petitioner to the exam hall and ensure his return to jail after the exam. To this end, the Court issued the following directions:1. Petitioner would deposit an amount of ₹75,000, as per the directions of the State;2. State would depute an adequate number of police personnel to take the petitioner from jail to the examination centre on the days on which the four exams are to be held.3. After each exam is over, the police personnel, who have been deputed by the State would take the petitioner back to the jail.4. The university is directed to permit the petitioner to take the said four exams on the petitioner showing his identity card.5. The university is further directed to ensure that the police personnel accompanying the petitioner are allowed to sit in a place where the petitioner is visible to them throughout the examination. The concerned police personnel are directed to keep a strict vigil on the petitioner so that the petitioner does not escape..Advocate Kanwalvir Singh Kang appeared for the petitioner. Senior Deputy Attorney General of Punjab NS Diwana represented the State. Advocate Deepak Singh Saini represented the university..[Read Order]