Resort facilities

Punjab: Bikramjit Singh Majithia Alleges Prison Facilities Unsafe; court warns prison authorities | Chandigarh News

MOHALI: Former Cabinet Minister and now accused in a drug trafficking case, Bikramjit Singh Majithia accused of being subjected to an atmosphere of insecurity and poor living conditions in prison. Majithia filed a new petition with the local court on Wednesday, after which the court issued a formal notice to prison authorities to file a response by April 8.
Majithia, in his new complaint, alleged that he was transferred to the “Jora Chakki” cell, which is in an extremely dilapidated state. The cell is 8ft by 8ft, additionally there is a toilet seat in a 3ft area which is separated from the cell by bricks at a height of 2ft. There is no water in the toilets. This cell was used to punish inmates. The ‘Jora Chakki’ has no longer housed any detainees because it is unfit for human stay in complete safety. He is 6ft 4in tall and it is virtually impossible for him to lie down in the cell.
The accused was denied his basic human needs for the sole purpose of humiliating and torturing him by his political opponents in the government. Majithia filed the application through his counsel, HS Dhanoa, Arshdeep Singh Kler and DS Sobti.
Prison Superintendent Sucha Singh Patiala, when appearing in person to file the response, alleged that the allegations in the application were incorrect, baseless, baseless and strongly denied. It is claimed that the accused Bikramjit Singh Majithia was confined in a cell at Patiala Central Jail as per the provisions of the Punjab Jail Handbook and all permissible facilities were provided to him.
24 hour security measures have been taken. Prisons operate within the parameters defined in the prison manual, which are the rules and regulations of the prison. Detainees should not expect additional facilities or benefits as if they were not housed in a place of detention but in a resort or hotel.
He further contended that the applicant had been provided with adequate security by prison officials and that the accused’s perception of threat had been factored into the security arrangements. The deponent is fully aware of his responsibility to ensure the safety of all prison inmates, including the accused. The deponent has personally made security arrangements to protect the life and physical integrity of the accused, as it is his duty under the law.