Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010119162016 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/5935/2016 SRI MADAN KUMAR and 10 ORS. S/O LT. SINGHARAM KUMAR, R/O DHORBAM, P.O. DHUPGURI, P.S. KHETRI, DIST- KAMRUP METRO, ASSAM, CONVICTED FOR LIFE REGOROUS IMPRISONMENT UNDER SECTION 302/326/460/341 IPC IN CONNECTION WITH SESSION CASE NO.16K 2000 2: DIPEN KALITA S/O LT. NAREN KALITA VILL. BARDADHI P.S. HAJO KAMRUP ASSAM 3: PRAFULLA CH. DAS S/O LT. ADIT DAS VILL. MANPUR P.S. PATARBARI MIRZA KAMRUP 4: ARUP SARMA S/O LT. BAIKUNTHA SARMA VILL. KHARGHULI P.S. LATASIL KAMRUP GUWAHATI 5: MANOJ DAS S/O SRI JOGEN DAS VILL. AMTOLA P.S. CHAIGAON KAMRUP ASSAM Page No.# 2/4 6: TANRIZ ALI S/O LT. MAHAR ALI VILL. DALETOLA P.S. HAJO KAMRUP ASSAM 7: MD. THAKUR ALI S/O LT. MAHAR ALI VILL. DALETOLA P.S. HAJO KAMRUP METRO 8: JOGOT BORO S/O SRI LAKHESWAR BORO VILL. GOSAIPARA P.S. BOKO KAMRUP ASSAM 9: SAFIQUL ALI S/O LT. ABDUL ALI VILL. KALAKUCHI P.S. MUKALMUA NALBARI ASSAM 10: DIPEN MAHANTA S/O LT. NABIN MAHANTA VILL. BARDADLI P.S. HAJO KAMRUP ASSAM 11: MOON DAS S/O LT. ANIL DAS VILL. BIRUBARI P.S. BIRUBARI KAMRUP ASSA VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM and 3 ORS. REP. BY THE CHIEF SECY., GOVT. OF ASSAM, DISPUR, GUWAHATI 2:THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY THE GOVT. OF ASSAM Page No.# 3/4 DEPTT. OF HOME AFFAIRS DISPUR GUWAHATI 3:THE INSPECTOR GENERAL OF PRISONS ASSAM KHANAPARA GHY-22 4:THE SUPERINTENDENT OF CENTRAL JAIL GUWAHATI SARUSAJAI GUWAHATI 5:THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE KAMRUP AMINGAON For the Petitioner(s) : None appears For the Respondent(s) : Mr. T.J. Mahanta, Sr. Advocate Mr. J. Handique, Govt. Advocate Mr. T. Gogoi, Advocate BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVASHIS BARUAH ORDER Date : 07.01.2025 None appears on behalf of the petitioners on call. 2. The instant writ petition has been filed challenging the orders dated 31.10.2015 and 29.01.2016 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kamrup (R) whereby the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kamrup (R) had observed that allowing the representation of the jail inmates would amount to making the jail premise obnoxious and ugly. 3. This Court has duly heard Mr. J. Handique, the learned Government Page No.# 4/4 Advocate appearing on behalf of the respondent Nos. 1, 2, 3 and 4 as well as Mr. T.J. Mahanta, the learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. T. Gogoi, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent No. 5. 4. From a perusal of the writ petition, it appears to this Court that no rights of the petitioners have been violated. Apart from the said it is also seen that the present application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is filed challenging a judicial order which in the opinion of this Court is not maintainable. 5. Accordingly, this Court finds no merit in the writ petition, for which, the instant writ petition stands dismissed. JUDGE Comparing Assistant