SC: Muhammed Ameer-Ul-Islam Transfer Plea, Kerala Must Respond

• The Supreme Court has sought a response from Kerala regarding death-row convict Muhammed Ameer-Ul-Islam's plea for transfer to an Assam prison.
• Muhammed Ameer-Ul-Islam, convicted for the 2016 rape and murder of a Dalit law student, seeks the transfer to be closer to his family in Assam.
• Senior Advocate Rebecca John cited Section 3 of the Transfer of Prisoners Act, arguing that appeal stages for the death sentence have passed.
• Justices Dipankar Datta and Sheel Nagu, presiding over the case, questioned whether Assam had provided consent for the proposed transfer.
• The petitioner's counsel confirmed that the State of Assam has not yet consented to the prisoner's relocation.

The Supreme Court's pointed query regarding Assam's consent highlights the critical requirement for securing explicit agreement from both the transferring and receiving states, even when a prisoner's family ties are a primary motivation for the request.

India's Supreme Court has initiated proceedings concerning a plea from Muhammed Ameer-Ul-Islam, a death-row convict, who seeks to be transferred from a Kerala prison to one in Assam. The apex court, on Monday, formally requested a response from the State of Kerala regarding this application. Ameer-Ul-Islam's petition aims to facilitate his relocation from Viyyur Central Prison in Kerala to a correctional facility in Assam, citing a desire to be closer to his family, including his wife and elderly parents who reside there.

Muhammed Ameer-Ul-Islam stands as the sole individual convicted and sentenced to death for the heinous 2016 rape and murder of a Dalit law student in Perumbavoor, Kerala, though the Supreme Court has stayed the execution of his death sentence pending appeal. The case, officially titled Muhammed Ameer Ul Islam v The State of Kerala & Ors., was brought before a Supreme Court bench comprising Justice Dipankar Datta and Justice Sheel Nagu, who are now overseeing the matter of his proposed inter-state transfer.

During the hearing, Senior Advocate Rebecca John, representing Muhammed Ameer-Ul-Islam, presented arguments grounded in Section 3 of the Transfer of Prisoners Act. She contended that, under ordinary circumstances, a prisoner sentenced to death cannot be transferred without explicit special permission from the government, unless their presence is specifically required before a court. John further highlighted that the procedural stages referenced in this provision had already been exhausted, noting that the Kerala High Court had already affirmed the death sentence.

John underscored that the customary rule prohibiting prisoner transfers until the conclusion or outcome of appeals had also been satisfied in this instance. However, the Supreme Court bench, specifically Justice Datta, raised a crucial jurisdictional question regarding the proposed Kerala Assam prisoner transfer consent. Justice Datta directly inquired about the State of Assam's stance, asking, "Where is the consent of Assam?" In response, Senior Advocate John acknowledged that the necessary consent from the State of Assam had not yet been secured.

This development underscores the significant procedural complexities inherent in the inter-state transfer of death-row convicts in India, particularly under Section 3 of the Transfer of Prisoners Act. The Supreme Court's pointed query regarding Assam's consent highlights the critical requirement for securing explicit agreement from both the transferring and receiving states, even when a prisoner's family ties are a primary motivation for the request.

The case of Muhammed Ameer-Ul-Islam's transfer plea to the Supreme Court serves as a pertinent example of how such applications, especially those involving capital punishment, are subject to stringent legal and administrative scrutiny. It reinforces that while statutory provisions exist for prisoner transfers, the practical implementation often hinges on the intricate coordination and consent between different state authorities, emphasizing the multi-layered legal framework governing death-row convict inter-state transfer in India.

This development underscores the procedural complexities and inter-state consent requirements for transferring death-row convicts under the Transfer of Prisoners Act, particularly Section 3. Lawyers advising on or litigating prisoner transfer applications must ensure all jurisdictional consents are secured and statutory conditions met, especially in high-profile or sensitive cases involving capital punishment.

Source: Original reporting via Bar and Bench