Handcuffing a accused in economic offence

It is not allowed and against Hon. Supreme court orders,kindly go through this.

In Prem Shankar Shukla and other leading cases, the Supreme Court has laid down strict procedural guidelines specifying both when and how the use of handcuffs is appropriate. According to the Court, handcuffing is legal only if the arrestee is (a) involved in serious non-bailable offences; and (b) previously convicted of a crime, of desperate character, likely to commit suicide, or likely to attempt to escape. The use of handcuffs and the reasons for their use must be recorded. It is illegal to walk fettered political prisoners through the streets. Furthermore, the police must gain judicial permission before they use restraints during an arrest or on a detainee. The human rights-conscious court summed up its opinion of handcuffs in Sunil Batra (II) v. Delhi Administration (1980): “To fetter prisoners in irons is an inhumanity unjustified, save where safe custody is otherwise impossible. The routine resort to handcuffs and irons bespeaks a barbarity hostile to our goal of human dignity and social justice.” Despite these clear, specific and unambiguous judgments from the Supreme Court, the abuse of handcuffs continues.  

Barbaric Bhooj Raj yadav has handcuffed India, Indians, all Indian constitutional Institutions since 1997, who will liberate  from him ?  

Whether India has got Independent Judiciary,  Legislature, Executive, Bureaucracy since 1997 ? 

Whether the Constitution of India, The Human Rights have effective to protect lives of the People of India or Barbaric Bhooj Raj yadav and gang joga sucharitha and her gang have right to murder, kill People by manufacturing Poisoned milk, all eatables Provisions, food, drinking water and all usables tooth paste, soaps etc. ? 

Since 1997  why India  has lost Independence to Barbaric Bhooj   Raj yadav and his gang ?

Why Andhra Pradesh Government the then Chief Minister N. Chandra Babu and his gang have granted  Enormous Powers to Barbaric Bhooj Raj yadav and  Joga Sucharitha and their  gang ?

Hand Cuffing is illegal that has been declared by the Supreme Court of India.

Thank you Advocate

In that case what action may be initiated against

1. erring authorities and 

2. who is responsible when he is treated this way in a hospital

Handcuffing is against the supreme court guideliness..

agreeing with the experts I will add that trial under 138 NI Act is criminal procedure and you are under misconception or its being civil nature.

Thank you Mr Sudhir for the clarification. But is it non bailable offence where a accused whose guilt hasnt been tried be handucuffed?!!

Firstly handcuffed on charges for the offences u/s 138 NI is illegal.  the supreme court has observed the following -

the only circumstance which validates incapacitation by irons –an extreme measure- is that otherwise there is no other reasonable way of preventing his escape, in the given circumstances. Securing the prisoner being necessity of judicial trial, the State must take steps in this behalf. Heavy deprivation of personal liberty must be justifiable as reasonable restriction in the circumstances…. So it is that to be consistent with Articles 14 and 19 handcuffs must be the last refuge not the routine regimen. If few more Guards will suffice, then no handcuffs. If a close watch by armed policemen will do then no handcuffs. If alternative measures may be provided, then no iron bondage. This is the legal norm.”

In India, the basic law for arrest is laid down in Chapter V of The Code of Criminal Procedure 1973. The Code stipulates (Section 46) that the person making the arrest shall actually touch or confine the body of the person to be arrested, unless there be a submission to the custody by word or action.

Why do we need to secure the arrested person or the prisoner at all? Besides the most important reason which is clear by section 49 of the Code that it is to prevent his escape, there are other cogent reasons which are not apparent on the face of the issue. Most important is that unsecured arrested person is easy to be forcibly taken away not only by the well-wishers of the arrested person but by his arch enemies also. Secondly it is also important to distinguish the arrested person and prisoner from other persons in the Crowd that is so common during Transit through train, Bus and other public transport and also in the Court Premises. Their inter-mingling with the crowd and possibility of melting away in the melee is not desirable. In any case the arrested person should not be tempted to develop a feeling that there are opportunities galore for his easy escape. Target hardening needs to be conspicuous. There have also been cases where after arrest an unsecured prisoner tried to commit suicide by jumping out from the vehicle or train or cause hurt to himself.

The legal position regarding Handcuffing is that it is primarily not permitted in India. Any Police person handcuffing an individual has to be ready to explain his conduct both in a Departmental action as well as before the Court where he could be hauled up for Contempt of Court.But
in many cases before the suspect is overpowered, he tries to run away avoiding arrest. Antecedents or character of suspect or even the details of offence and accomplices present around may not be clear at the time of confronting the suspect. Therefore it stands to reason that once there is a prima-facie suspicion of involvement in a cognizable offence, the suspect must be arrested and his hands restrained by use of handcuffs. No doubt the use of handcuffs is a use of force and therefore it must stand the test of reasonableness. A balance of Human rights of the prisoner/arrested person and the society at large has to be reached.

Unfortunately there is no empirical data or credible research done in this area to suggest the efficacy or otherwise of handcuffing or the extra manpower load on the police which is required to implement the Supreme Court verdict of “No Handcuff is the rule.”

Thank you so much Mr T. Kalaiselvan for your valuable suggestion.

What action can be initiated on the erring authorities. Is the doctor liable for violation of SC order?

The matter can be taken up legally.  A petition can be filed before the court conducting the trial alternately the matter can be taken up before the State Human Rights Commission seeking legal action against the erring officials.

as per provisioins shared by Mr Kalaiselvan, even accused of non-bailable offence cannot be handcufffed.

It is violation of law ladi down by Apex Court.

as per provisioins shared by Mr Kalaiselvan, even accused of non-bailable offence cannot be handcufffed.

It is violation of law ladi down by Apex Court.