Why were video/ voice call facilities withdrawn from prisons? Bombay High Court asks Maharashtra government

The Bombay High Court on Wednesday asked the Maharashtra government to explain why voice and video-call facilities had been withdrawn from prisons across the State [Peoples Union for Civil Liberties & Anr v. State of Maharashtra]..A Bench of Chief Justice Dipankar Datta and Justice VG Bisht, however, indicated that it was not inclined to pass any urgent order for resumption of video and voice call facilities till the State files its reply in the plea. .The High Court was hearing a public interest litigation (PIL) seeking immediate steps to ensure that telephonic or electronic modes of communication are implemented in all prisons in the State. The plea, filed through Advocate Mihir Joshi, claimed that replacing voice and video-calls with physical mulaqats was extremely near-sighted, contrary to legal provisions, and caused unnecessary hardships on the family members and legal representatives of the prisoners.Before adjourning the matter, the Bench mused aloud if there had been any incident of security breach that led to the facilities being withdrawn across prisons.The Bench directed the government to file its reply by June 10, and posted the matter for hearing on June 20..The plea filed by NGO Peoples Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL) stated that when prison mulaqats had been stopped in 2020 due to the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, prison authorities provided telephone and video-conference facilities to prisoners to speak with their respective lawyers and relatives. However, this facility was abruptly stopped in 2021, Advocate Rebecca Gonsalves, appearing for PUCL, claimed.Advocate General Ashutosh Kumbhakoni informed the Court that while he would seek instructions on this issue from the Inspector-General (Prisons), there was an apprehension of a security breach as it would be difficult to know who the inmates are talking to.He argued that one of the possible reasons for shutting down video calling facilities was due to the resumption of physical mulaqats. Additionally, the inmates had call facilities made available through coin telephone boxes.Gonsalves argued that the video-call facilities ought to be made permanent regardless.The Court, however, opined that this was for the government to decide.