Jailed murder convicts can study law online, rules Supreme Court
A bench of justices Surya Kant and N Kotiswar Singh dismissed BCI’s challenge to a Kerala high court order that allowed the convicts to continue their education, pointing out that education could prove transformative for inmates.
The Supreme Court on Friday upheld the right of two murder convicts in Kerala to pursue legal studies online while serving life sentences, criticising the Bar Council of India (BCI) for standing in the way of a “reformatory move”.
A bench of justices Surya Kant and N Kotiswar Singh dismissed BCI’s challenge to a Kerala high court order that allowed the convicts to continue their education, pointing out that education could prove transformative for inmates.
“Why should BCI oppose a direction like this? This is reformative. Instead of supporting such a progressive move, you are following an orthodox approach,” the bench lashed out at BCI’s counsel. The court further remarked, “They had appeared in the entrance exam and cleared it…let them continue their education. What if they are acquitted in the future?”
BCI, opposing the high court’s verdict, argued that allowing convicts to study law online could set a wrong precedent, especially since law courses are not allowed online and involve physical classes, apart from practical experiences. However, the top court refused to entertain this argument, emphasizing that education in prison serves reformatory and rehabilitative purposes.
BCI, which argued that it has the legal authority to regulate legal education, found itself at the receiving end of justice Kant’s scathing remarks: “I personally feel BCI should not be involved in legal education at all. It should be left to jurists and scholars. BCI should have mercy on legal education.”
{{/usCountry}}BCI, which argued that it has the legal authority to regulate legal education, found itself at the receiving end of justice Kant’s scathing remarks: “I personally feel BCI should not be involved in legal education at all. It should be left to jurists and scholars. BCI should have mercy on legal education.”
{{/usCountry}}The court, while dismissing the petition on both procedural and substantive grounds, observed that the case had been delayed by an inordinate 394 days. It ruled that there was no justification to interfere with the Kerala high court’s 2023 decision.
{{/usCountry}}The court, while dismissing the petition on both procedural and substantive grounds, observed that the case had been delayed by an inordinate 394 days. It ruled that there was no justification to interfere with the Kerala high court’s 2023 decision.
{{/usCountry}}“We are satisfied that the high court order granting permission to the respondents number 2 and 3 to attend classes, in the peculiar circumstances of this case, does not warrant any interference. The petition is dismissed on the ground of delay as well as merit. The question of law, however, is kept open,” the order stated.
{{/usCountry}}“We are satisfied that the high court order granting permission to the respondents number 2 and 3 to attend classes, in the peculiar circumstances of this case, does not warrant any interference. The petition is dismissed on the ground of delay as well as merit. The question of law, however, is kept open,” the order stated.
{{/usCountry}}The origins of this legal battle date back to November 2023, when the Kerala high court granted permission to two murder convicts, Pattakka Suresh Babu and V Vinoyi, to study law via online mode. Both had cleared the entrance examination for law school and sought temporary bail to attend classes, prompting the high court’s intervention.
Suresh, currently housed at the Open Prison and Correctional Home in Cheemeni, Kannur, is enrolled at KMCT Law College, Kuttipuram, while Vinoyi, incarcerated at the Central Prison, Kannur, is pursuing legal studies at Sree Narayana Law College, Poothotta, Ernakulam.
The Kerala high court had taken a strong stand in favour of prisoners’ rights, stating that education is a fundamental human right and should not be denied merely because someone is behind bars.
