38.6c New Delhi, India, Friday, August 15, 2025
Top Stories Supreme Court
Political NEWS Legislative Corner Celebstreet International Videos
Subscribe Contact Us
close
Judiciary

Detaining Persons Beyond Requisite Quarantine Period in Quarantine Centers Is Violative of Article 21: Allahabad HC [READ ORDER]

By Parth Thummar      02 June, 2020 08:35 PM      0 Comments
Detaining Persons Beyond Requisite Quarantine Period in Quarantine Centers Is Violative

The Allahabad High Court has on May 30, 2020, directed the State Government to ensure that the persons who have completed their quarantine period are released from Quarantine Centers, provided they have been tested negative and that there is no legal impediment in releasing them. Direction to this effect was passed by Division Bench of Justices Shashi Kant Gupta and Saurabh Shyam Shamshery in the Public Interest Litigation after treating a letter written by Shaad Anwar, Advocate as PIL. In the letter, Mr. Shaad had sought the release of the members of Tablighi Jamat, who were quarantined after they returned to Uttar Pradesh after visiting Markaz Nizamuddin, Delhi in the morning on March 05, 2020. 

Mr. Shaad had furnished details of the 45 members of Tablighi Jamat, who were sent to Quarantine Centre at various places within the State of Uttar Pradesh. He had submitted that all the persons so quarantined had completed the period prescribed but the State was not releasing them without any just and valid reason. While alleging violation of the fundamental right of such quarantined persons as enshrined under Article 21 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner had stated that a direction was required to be issued to the State to release such persons forthwith.

On its May 29, 2020, order, the Court had asked the State to make available all details pertaining to the members of Tablighi Jamat, who were quarantined, released after completing the quarantine period or had yet not been released despite completing the tenure of quarantine and also give reasons for not releasing such persons.

On May 30, 2020, report filed pursuant to the Court direction, the State had stated that none of the members of the Tablighi Jamat, who were Indians, were under detention in the Quarantine Centers in the State of Uttar Pradesh as they all had already been released from the Quarantine Centers. They had returned to their respective States barring few members who had made their own private arrangements for their stay.

In this backdrop, the petitioner had further contended that few members (Indians) of Tablighi Jamat, were still in Quarantine Centres but the State had failed to provide details of such members. In this regard, the Court held that Since the petitioner has failed to disclose the names of such members of Tablighi Jamat, who have not been released from the Quarantine Center, we find no reasons to disbelieve the statement made by the learned Additional Advocate General appearing on behalf of the State. However, the Court made it clear that it would be open to the petitioner to ventilate its grievances in accordance with law before the appropriate forum in case he discovers later on that some members of Tablighi Jamat are still detained in the Quarantine Center despite completing the requisite period of quarantine. Regarding its Constitutional duty, the Court observed that,

As a guardian of the Constitution, this Court has a duty to interfere whenever there is an abuse of power or usurpation of a right conferred by the Constitution. Persons, who have completed their quarantine period and have tested negative cannot be further detained in the Quarantine Centers against their wishes. It would be in violation of personal liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.

In this regard, the Court further directed the Chief Secretary, State of Uttar Pradesh to set up a three members committee in every district to ensure smoother, greater and more effective functioning of the Quarantine Centers. The Court made it clear that this Committee shall not only supervise the functioning but to see that the Quarantine Centers are properly maintained, controlled and administered and also provide help, assistance, guidance in the wake of difficulties and problems faced by the persons, who are quarantined and further ensure that the persons, who have completed quarantine period, are released forthwith provided they have tested negative after completing quarantine period and there is no legal impediment in releasing them.

 

[READ ORDER



Share this article:



Leave a feedback about this
TRENDING NEWS

sc-sets-aside-bail-to-actor-darshan-warns-jail-officials-against-vip-treatment
Trending CelebStreet
SC sets aside bail to actor Darshan; warns jail officials against VIP treatment

SC cancels bail to actor Darshan in murder case; slams VIP jail perks, warns officials to uphold rule of law and treat all accused equally.

14 August, 2025 12:30 PM
sc-refuses-stay-on-directions-for-immediate-shifting-of-stray-dogs-to-shelter-homes
Trending Judiciary
SC refuses stay on directions for immediate shifting of stray dogs to shelter homes

SC refuses to stay order directing urgent relocation of stray dogs in Delhi-NCR; asks intervenors to file affidavits amid rising dog bite concerns.

14 August, 2025 03:33 PM

TOP STORIES

sc-declines-to-interfere-with-patkars-conviction-in-defamation-case
Trending Judiciary
SC declines to interfere with Patkar's conviction in defamation case

SC refuses to interfere with Medha Patkar’s conviction in 2001 defamation case filed by Delhi L-G V K Saxena, but sets aside ₹1 lakh penalty imposed on her.

11 August, 2025 02:29 PM
sc-directs-for-removing-stray-dogs-in-delhi-ncr
Trending Judiciary
SC directs for removing stray dogs in Delhi NCR

SC orders removal of all stray dogs in Delhi-NCR within 8 weeks, to be housed in shelters; warns against obstruction amid rising rabies, dog-bite cases.

11 August, 2025 06:42 PM
hc-judges-in-no-way-inferior-to-sc-judges-sc
Trending Judiciary
HC judges in no way inferior to SC judges: SC

SC affirms HC judges are equal in stature to SC judges; directs apology for unfounded allegations against Telangana HC judge.

12 August, 2025 12:14 PM
law-does-not-require-to-provide-separate-list-of-electors-not-included-in-draft-rolls
Trending Judiciary
Law does not require to provide separate list of electors not included in draft rolls, EC tells SC

EC tells SC no legal mandate to publish separate list or reasons for voters excluded from draft rolls; affected persons can file claims under Form 6.

12 August, 2025 12:33 PM

ADVERTISEMENT


Join Group

Signup for Our Newsletter

Get Exclusive access to members only content by email