Source: Supreme Court   

Why in News? 

A bench comprising of Justice B.R. Gavai and Justice K.V. Viswanathan held that “awareness is the key" and to create awareness adequate measures should be taken to display the address and contact number of the nearest legal aid officer in public places such as police stations, bus stands and post offices, and railways. 

• The Supreme Court held this in the case of Suhas Chakma v. Union of India & Ors.  

What was the Background of Suhas Chakma v. Union of India & Ors.? 

• A Writ Petition, filed under Article 32 of the Indian Constitution, seeks a Writ, Order, or direction for the Union of India, States, and Union Territories to prevent prisoners from experiencing torture or inhumane treatment due to overcrowded and unhygienic prison conditions. 
• On 22nd April 2024, the Supreme Court appointed Senior Advocate Shri Vijay Hansaria as Amicus Curiae to assist in the matter. Subsequently, on 9th May 2024, Shri K. Parameshwar (Amicus Curiae) and Ms. Rashmi Nandakumar, representing the National Legal Services Authority (NALSA), were added to the case. 
• The Amicus Curiae suggested a format for a letter to inform convicts of their right to free legal aid, which was later modified in consultation with NALSA and approved by the Court. 
• On 15th July 2024, NALSA circulated the approved letter format to all State Legal Services Authorities (SLSAs) and requested data on prisoners' access to free legal aid. Ms. Nandakumar submitted a detailed note on 9th September 2024, outlining the responses and the progress in ensuring access to free legal aid for prisoners. 

What were the Court’s Observations? 

The Supreme Court issued following directions: 

• Commendation and Continuation of Efforts: The Court appreciates the efforts of NALSA, SLSAs, and DLSAs, encouraging them to continue striving toward the constitutional and statutory objectives of providing legal aid. 
• Efficient Operation of SOP: NALSA, in collaboration with SLSAs and DLSAs, must ensure the SOP on Access to Legal Aid Services and PLACs operates effectively, periodically updating measures to address field-level issues. 
• Enhanced Monitoring of PLACs: Legal Services Authorities at various levels must adopt stronger monitoring and review practices to evaluate PLACs.
• Statistical Analysis and Improvement: The Legal Services Authorities should update and analyze data regularly, taking corrective actions as needed. 
• Effective Operation of Legal Aid Defence Counsel System: Periodic inspection and improvement of service conditions for Legal Aid Defence Counsels should be ensured to enhance the system’s effectiveness. 
• Robust Awareness Mechanism: A comprehensive, regularly updated awareness mechanism should be implemented to inform the public about legal aid services, especially through local languages and promotional campaigns in accessible public areas. 
• Promotion of Legal Aid Accessibility: 
  • Display information in public places and conduct local-language promotional campaigns. 
  • Initiate creative methods, such as street plays in rural areas, to raise awareness without disrupting daily life. 
• Review of SOP-2022 for UTRC: Periodic review and updates should be applied to SOP-2022 for Undertrial Review Committees. 
• Addressing UTRC Gaps: The disparity between UTRC-identified persons and those recommended or successfully applying for release must be addressed by NALSA and other authorities. 
• Diligent Pursuit of "Early Access to Justice" Framework: NALSA’s framework for pre-litigation support at the pre-arrest and remand stages should be actively pursued and regularly reviewed. 
• Periodic Interaction with Convicts: Legal Service Authorities should interact with convicts who have not appealed, informing them of their right to free legal aid. 
• Regular Engagement with JVLs and PLVs: Regular interaction should occur with Jail Visiting Lawyers and Para Legal Volunteers to keep their knowledge current and the system efficient. 
• Continuing Education and Resources for Lawyers: Legal Services Authorities must ensure ongoing education for lawyers involved in pre-litigation and defense counsel, providing access to legal resources and online libraries. 
• Digital Reporting System: DLSAs, SLSAs, and NALSA should implement a digitized reporting process to facilitate real-time data updates and oversight. 
• Cooperation from Government Authorities: The Union of India and State Governments must support the Legal Services Authorities to effectively implement these directives. 
• Information on Free Legal Aid in Judicial Documents: The Registry will send this judgment to all High Courts, suggesting that they issue practice directions to provide free legal aid information with all court judgments and notices. Additionally, High Courts are encouraged to display legal aid information on their websites. 

What are the Legal Provisions with Regard to Free Legal Aid? 

• Article 39 A: Equal Justice and Free Legal Aid 
  • Free Legal Aid can be found in the Constitution under Part IV i.e. Directive Principles of State Policy (DPSP).  
  • This has been added by the 42nd Constitutional Amendment.  
  • This provision states that the State shall in particular provide free legal aid by suitable legislation or schemes or in any other way, to ensure that opportunities for securing justice are not denied to any citizen by reason of economic or other disabilities.  
  • Thus, the above is the constitutional goal 
• The Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987 (LSA Act) 
  • The legislation has been enacted to constitute legal services authorities to provide free and competent legal services to the weaker sections of society.  
  • The aim of the legislation is to ensure that opportunities for securing justice are not denied to any citizen by reason of any economic or other disabilities.   
  • Section 3 of the LSA Act constituted the National Legal Services Authority (NALSA).  
  • Section 4 of LSA lays down the functions of the NALSA and the relevant ones are as follows: 
    • lay down policies and principles for making legal services available under the provisions of this Act  
    • frame the most effective and economical schemes for the purpose of making legal services available under the provisions of this Act  
    • utilise the funds at its disposal and make appropriate allocations of funds to the State Authorities and District Authorities  
    • monitor and evaluate implementation of the legal aid programmes at periodic intervals and provide for independent evaluation of programmes and schemes implemented in whole or in part by funds provided under this Act. 
• Section 341 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) 
  • This provision under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) provides for Legal aid to accused at the State expense in certain cases. 
  • Section 341 (1) provides that the Court assign an advocate for the defence of accused at the expense of State in following cases: 
    • Where, in a trial or appeal before a Court, the accused is not represented by an advocate, and  
    • Where it appears to the Court that the accused has not sufficient means to engage an advocate 
  • Section 341 (2) provides that the High Court may with the previous approval of the State Government make the rules providing for: 
    • the mode of selecting advocates for defence under sub-section (1)  
    • the facilities to be allowed to such advocates by the Courts  
    • the fees payable to such advocates by the Government, and generally, for carrying out the purposes of sub-section (1) 
  • Section 341 (3) provides that State Government may, by notification, direct that, as from such date as may be specified in the notification, the provisions of sub-sections (1) and (2) shall apply in relation to any class of trials before other Courts in the State as they apply in relation to trials before Courts of Session. 

Case Laws 

• Hussainara Khatoon and Others v. Home Secretary, State of Bihar, Patna (1980)   
  • A procedure which does not make available legal services to an accused person who is too poor to afford a lawyer and who would, therefore, have to go through the trial without legal assistance, cannot possibly be regarded as “reasonable, fair and just”. 
  • It is an essential ingredient of reasonable, fair and just procedure to a prisoner who is to seek his liberation through the court's process that he should have legal services available to him. 
• Madhav Hayawadanrao Hoskot v. State of Maharashtra (1978) 
  • Right to counsel for a prisoner is a fundamental right traceable to Article 21.  
  • Right to legal aid is a State’s duty and not Government’s charity.  
  • The Court held that procedural safeguards are indispensable to the essence of liberty under Article 21.