ABSTRACT- This research paper critically analyses the rights of prisoners within the legal framework of India. The paper delves into the multifaceted dimensions of prisoner rights, shedding light on constitutional guarantees. It offers an in-depth examination of the challenges prisoners face in accessing their rights, particularly within the context of overcrowding, inadequate facilities, and the criminal justice system’s inefficiencies. Undertrial prisoners are also facing issues and suffering due to lack of better administration.
The research paper evaluates the legal provisions and mechanisms in place to safeguard prisoners’ rights, such as the right to a fair trial, right to humane treatment, and right to legal representation. It highlights the impact of landmark judgments and legislative reforms on prisoner rights in India.
It offers a comprehensive overview of the rights of prisoners in India within the existing legal framework. It identifies gaps in the system and suggests recommendations for enhancing the protection of these rights, ultimately contributing to the ongoing discourse on human rights and criminal justice in India.
KEYWORDS- Prisoners, human rights, fundamental rights, under-trial, accused.
INTRODUCTION – Before Independence of India, when we were under the rule of English rulers, the condition of prison was ferocious and bloodthirsty. All the Indians prisoners were treated as inhuman and considered them like monstrous. Like if we talk about our freedom fighters who fought for our independence, they were supposed to be as criminals and they were also kept in a prison who was in a very worst condition. They suffered a lot due to lack of good administration of jails and prisons of that time. Biased treatment was clearly present between Indian prisoners and English prisoners.
At that time there was not any rules, regulations, legislations which regulate the rights of prisoners. The main purpose of making any related legislation should be the protection of human rights. Because every person of this earth has a natural right which is given by nature. Nobody can take any natural right which is inalienable in nature. No human being can live without human rights whether they are any terrorist, dangerous gangster, or any prisoner (convicted or under-trial).
Nobody can confine any criminal in one room without any reasonable reason or without any proper prison administration. They are also a human being even after committed a crime and their expectation cannot be easily fade by not giving any rights inside the prison. In our country i.e. India, the State Government has main power to manage the administration of jail of every State and provide necessities to all the prisoners. In the present scenario prisoners are not aware about his rights because there is no proper communication between jail authorities and state government and prisoners. Government speaks about many rights with less implementation, which results bad effect on the rights of mainly poor workers, poor prisoners, poor employees, poor servants etc.
The foundation of our Indian society is based on the mutual respect of each other and non- violence. Conviction of a crime does not diminish a person’s status as a human being and every unrestricted humanitarian right must be accessible to every citizen and prisoners. Prisoners are not aware about his rights in India, which creates undue influence by jail authorities upon prisoner inmates.
V.R. Krishna Ayer (J) has rightly observed: “In our world, prisons are still laboratories of torture, warehouses in which human commodities are sadistically kept and where spectrums of inmates range from drift-wood juveniles to heroic dissenters.”[1]
“The word criminal prisoner means any prisoner duly committed to custody under the writ, warrant, or order of any Court or authority exercising criminal jurisdiction, or by order of a Court-martial”.[2]
Since 1980’s, SC of India has emerged a concept of PIL (Public Interest Litigation) where the civic-minded individual or social activist can maintain an application for an appropriate direction, order, writ seeking judicial concern on behalf of the oppressed classes. Then, at the time of national emergency, numerous innocent individuals, including political opponents, were imprisoned, and all civil and political rights were completely violated. The judges also intended to restore the Supreme Court’s reputation, which had been seriously damaged by a judgment rendered during the emergency.[3]
“That’s why Justice V. R. KRISHNA IYER and P. N. BHAGWATI of the Supreme Court developed the concept of speedy trial to the underprivileged and disadvantaged people”. In 1979, the first PIL case was primarily concerned with the inhumane treatment of detainees or under trial prisoners. A lawyer filed a PIL in one case because hundreds of inmates awaiting trial who are being held in prisons.[4]
Over 40,000 convicts who were awaiting trial were released after this case highlighted. The right to speedy trial was also emerged as a fundamental right. The Indian Supreme Court has taken a leading role in addressing human rights abuses that have occurred in Indian prisons and upheld a number of inmates’ rights by applying a positive interpretation to articles 21, 19, 22, 32, 37, and 39-A of the Constitution.
There are various provisions in our Indian Constitution regarding the rights of prisoner like: –
- Right to life and personal liberty except those which can be restricted by procedure established by law.
- Right to free legal aid which is available in both at trial and appellate stage.
- Right against solitary confinement.
- Right against handcuffing.
- Right to speedy trial.
- Right to fair trial.
- Rights of arrested person under Article 22(1) and (2) etc.
The provisions relating to rights of prisoners does not expressly mention in our Indian Constitution, but in case of T.V. VATHEESWARAN Vs STATE OF TAMIL NADU6, it was held that the Articles 14, 19 & 21 are available to the prisoners as well as freemen. Prison walls do not keep out fundamental rights.[5]
“It would not be out of place to quote here a historical story which will make the concern of dignity clear in every body’s mind when SIKANDAR conquered the King PURU, he asked him as to how he should behave with him? PURU replied that he must behave with him like a king. This story makes it clear that a king is always a king. It does not make any difference whether he is ruling, defeated, or flayed. Similarly, a human being whether criminal/prisoner or law-abiding is entitled to dignity i.e. fundamental rights. Prisoners also are entitled to be treated honourably by police and jail authorities[6].”
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY – This research work being a doctrinal and non- empirical research did not require any field data or sample collection. The data collection was restricted to only the primary and secondary sources. All the relevant sources were broadly classified into two basic categories namely Primary and Secondary sources.
- Primary sources used in this research are the Constitution of India, judgments of Higher Judiciary (i.e. The Supreme Court and High Court). Furthermore, The Prisons Act, 1894 is also referred because it is a first legislation regarding prisoners.
- Secondary sources have included the study of all legal and non-legal relevant texts, research articles, online sources (like: reliable websites like JSTOR, HEINONLINE, IPLEADERS, LEGAL SERVICES and others.)
REVIEW OF LITERATURE –
- When criminal commits any cognizable offence then police have a right to arrest him without warrant and put him in police custody. Police is not having any arbitrary power to complete the investigation of crime in unlimited period, in fact there is a time period in which police have to complete the investigation in 24 hours, otherwise, accused must be present before magistrate and then comes under judicial custody where the time period of investigation is increased up to 60 and 90 days according to the gravity of offence. After completed the investigation, trial is the next stage which is most necessary to convict or acquit the undertrial prisoner.
A person who is in judicial custody on remand during investigation is in the definition of ‘under trial’. Now the problem is-
- DATA ON UNDER TRIALS IN INDIA: “According to the Prison Statistics India report published by the National Crime Records Bureau in 2020 around 76 percent of the jail inmates in the country were under trials, out of which 68 percent were either illiterate or school dropouts”.
- Of the 554,034 prisoners, 427,165, or 77 percent, were undertrials in 2021. This was a 14.9 percent increase from 371,848 undertrials in prison in 2020.[7]
This data shows there is a huge number of under-trial prisoners and convicted prisoners also who is not aware about their rights. “The Supreme Court has made it clear that unless a crime is devious and attracts a punishment of seven years or more, no arrest is to be made. But this is being ignored and the police across the country continue to make arrests based on flimsy charges,” said Gonsalves. “Enforcing this order of the court in itself would reduce the number of prisoners in the country by half.”
At one side there is a legal principle in Indian Criminal Jurisprudence “that every person accused of any crime is considered innocent until proven guilty”. And at other side, the criminal who comes under the category of under-trial prisoners, is detained in prisons for long periods. Under-trials prisoners are victims of slow judicial process who is waiting for conviction or acquittal in jail. Under trial prisoners may be held in prison for term longer than punishment. It violates the basic human right and fundamental right to fair and speedy trial and free legal aid.
To understand the importance of protecting the rights of undertrial prisoners, we must first recognize the issue they face: –
- One significance issue is the occurrence of arbitrary arrest. Many times, individuals are apprehended without any proper evidence. As a result, innocent people find themselves in custody, awaiting their day in court.
- There exists an unsatisfactorily bail system. Under-trial prisoner are in detention for extended period while their trials are pending.
- Under-trial prisoners are end up spending years behind bars without being convicted.
- Delay in investigation is also an issue facing by under-trial prisoners.
- Money determines the duration of their incarceration. Many under-trials who is economically disadvantaged background, and their inability to pay their bail fees results in prolonged period of imprisonment even after the amendment comes under Sec436A of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.
- In 2001, centre gave funds to state to established FAST TRACK COURTS to speedy trial of case of under trial prisoner. Even though the cases of under trial prisoners are still pending and not resolved.
- In India, the provision which has been added to provide the rights of the prisoners is not sufficiently implemented, which create overcrowding in prisons due to this number of cases are pending in courts. Insufficient number of advocates to deal with the cases, poor dedication to solve the issues of under trial prisoners are present.
- As a result, there are violations of fundamental human rights that negatively impact prison conditions, including custodial deaths, violence/torture, inhumane treatment, inedible food, inadequate water supply, a lack of space for sleep, a poor health system that fails to produce prisoners for court appearances, unjustifiably continuous confinement, forced labor, and other issues that prisoners are facing with many years.
- The criminal laws of India, the Constitution, jail manuals, international covenants, and judicial pronouncements more or less contain the rights of the alleged accused, suspect, under trial detainees, and convicted prisoners. There is a need of proper implementation of laws. Whether these laws are actually implementing according to the needs of the prisoners or not.
- The crime against Human Dignity is the abuse and violation of the rights of the accused, inmates under trial, and criminals. Whether the current legal framework and criminal legislation are weak and ineffective in this respect or not.
- It is firmly considered that reformative penal, police, and prison law must be developed in order to address the criminological and penological issues surrounding crime and offenders in Indian society.
LEGISLATIVE FRAMEWORK OF PRISONERS RIGHTS –
Prisoners are also a human being even after the committed of crime. It includes the various legal rights, constitutional rights, and other statutory safeguards to convicted or under-trial prisoners.
Constitutional safeguards – It provides right against the conviction for the offence and right against the self- incrimination.[8]One of the most important Article 21, everyone has a right to life with human dignity. The right to life and Personal Liberty is the back bone of the Human Rights in India. Nobody can be deprived from his life and personal dignity because the word ‘life’ also includes ‘living with dignity’ in this case [9]. Therefore ‘life” did not mean mere animal existence, as upheld in the MANEKA GANDHI v UNION OF INDIA[10] case.
Article 22 provides the safeguards to the arrested person by informing the grounds of arrest, granted the right to choose lawyer of his/her choice, and present the accused before the nearest Magistrate under 24 hours. Judiciary has also upheld this right in this case. [11]
Right to write is also an important right which must be given to the prisoner. By this right prisoner can express their views to the outside world on any matter like what is the condition of prison system, what is going on in jail and they can also write a letter to his family members, friends, relatives or lawyer. They can share his political views. They can enjoy freedom to speak and express anything via letter, article, any book without any limitation of pages and words. But written content cannot be against the security of India otherwise it will be censored by jail authorities and restriction can be imposed. In most of the decision of the SC, court mentioned that right to life also includes right to express oneself under article 21 but prison administrations hardly taken note of such rulings.[12]
LACUNAE IN LEGISLATION –
For more than a century, we have grappled with the absence of a comprehensive legislation framework to safeguard the rights of prisoners. The Prison Act of 1894, last amended in 1957, remains an inadequate piece of legislation in addressing the rights and need of prisoners. In 1894, The Prison Act was passed by the colonizers government which deals with the laws relating to prisons in India. This act includes maintenance of prisons, duties of prison officers, powers of deputy and assistant jailers, admission, discharge and removal of prisoners, discipline of prisoners, employment of prisoners, health of prisoners, visit to prisoners, law relating to prison offences by any prison.
This act does not include any welfare acts for prisoners and it does not help to any prisoner to become a good human being because the object of this act was only to regulate the administration of prison and not to reform any prisoner[13]. This act does not carry the provisions related to rehabilitate and reformation of prisoner in prison. The actual implementation is not followed by any jail authorities which creates problems among people.
This act has many criticisms because the provisions of this act has not any relevance in present scenario as many people are attached with human rights. There was no provision related to protection of human rights of prisoners. This act did not include the specific provisions related to human rights for women prisoner except one or two, which is not enough in today’s society. By this act, they were more consideration about the prison working than the treatment of prisoners.
After this Act, there are many legislations which came in India before and after independence, namely: –
- The Prisoners Act, 1900
- The Transfers of Prisoners Act, 1950
- The Repatriation of Prisoners Act, 2003
- Model Prison Manual, 2003
- Indian Penal Code, 1860
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973
- Identification of Prisoners Act, 1920
- The Prisoners (Attendance in Courts) Act, 1955
Despite several initiatives, including Mulla Committee’s recommendations on jail reform and the drafting of a new bill by the government in collaboration with National Human Rights Commission (NHRC), a law for prisoner’s right but the dream to keep it in parliament is kept away till date. While our Constitution stands as the sentinel of human rights, it lacks specific provisions exclusively dedicated to prisoners. It is high time for our legislature to fulfil its duty by enacting laws that not only protect society but also offer prisoners a chance at rehabilitation and reintegration into the mainstream.
INTERNATIONAL SAFEGURADS OF PRISONERS RIGHTS- International safeguards for prisoners’ rights are essential agreements established at the global level to ensure humane treatment, fair trials, and protection of individuals deprived of their liberty. These safeguards are crucial to uphold human rights, prevent abuses, and provide justice. India has signed various international conventions on different aspects of human rights, which evolve after the establishment of U.N.
Here’s a simplified explanation of some key international instruments and principles:
- Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) –
Article 9 – “No one shall be subjected to arbitrary arrest, detention or exile”. This means that governments cannot arrest or detain people for no reason or without proper legal procedures.
- International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) –
Article 9 – “Everyone has the right to liberty and security of person.”
Article 10 – “All persons deprived of their liberty shall be treated with humanity and with respect for the inherent dignity and of the human person.”
- Convention for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment –
Article 1 – “No one shall be subjected to torture, or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment”.
- The United Nations Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners (Nelson Mandela Rules)-
Rule 1– “All prisoners shall be treated with the respect due to their inherent dignity and value as human beings”.
ROLE OF JUDICIARY TO PROTECT THE FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS OF PRISONERS
Judiciary plays an important role in safeguarding the fundamental rights of prisoners in India. These rights are enshrined in the Constitution of India in various Articles as include the right to life and personal liberty, right to equality and right to be treated as dignity among others. It ensures that even those accused of crimes are treated with dignity and have access to a fair legal process. In India, human rights hold a prominent position in our legal framework. Our Constitution often regarded as the cornerstone of our democracy, not only guarantees fundamental rights but also empowers our highest courts to protect and enforce these rights. This provides a strong foundation for the protection of human rights.
Here are some judgments of Supreme Court in which the court protect the fundamental rights of the prisoners: –
- Preventing Torture and Inhuman Treatment – The Judiciary ensures that prisoners are not subjected to torture or inhuman treatment. In the case of D.K. Basu v State of West Bengal (1997)[14], Supreme Court issued guidelines to prevent custodial torture and protect the dignity of individuals in custody.
- Right to Speedy Trial – Prisoners have the right to speedy trial. The Judiciary intervenes if there are unreasonable delays in the trial process. For instance, in case of Hussainara Khatoon v Home Secretary, State of Bihar (1980)[15], the Supreme Court ordered the release of under-trial prisoners who had been in custody for prolonged periods awaiting trial and held that prolonged detention without trial violates the right to personal liberty.
- Right to Legal Aid– The Judiciary ensures that prisoners have access to legal aid. In the case of Khatri v State of Bihar (1981)[16], the Supreme Court held that it is the duty of the state to provide legal aid to indigent prisoners.
- Prison Reforms – Court often issues directions for prison reforms to improve living conditions, healthcare, and vocational training for prisoners. In the case of Sunil Batra v Delhi Administration (1978)[17], the Supreme Court laid down guidelines for prison reforms.
- Protection of Human Dignity – The Judiciary emphasizes that prisoners, though deprived of liberty, retain their human dignity. In the case of Charles Sobhraj v Superintendent, Central Jail (1978)[18], the Delhi High Court held that even prisoners have the right to be treated with humanity.
The Supreme Court gave a various judgment related to the protection of prisoners but the implementation of these judgment is very slow. The main problem is to do the implement of these judgment in real world which increase the pendency of these cases in court again and again. The main role and responsibility of these problems is in the hands of “Executive” and “Judiciary”. These pillars protect and safeguard the life and liberty of the citizens of the country. Continuous efforts are needed to strengthen and implement these safeguards effectively.
SUGGESTIONS
- Instead of keeping a prisoner within the confines of their cell, authorities must focus on their rehabilitation.
- There are several appeals waiting before the higher courts, for better and quicker proceedings, the judiciary needs to appoint additional judges.
- In every prison, there should be a Prisoners Grievance Committee.
- There should be a new legislation with adequate provisions related to prison activities or prisoners’ rights.
- The bail provisions must be liberalized in order to maximum released of under-trial prisoners.
CONCLUSION
Person(s) who are deprived of their liberty against their will is said to be a convict. This may be accomplished by detention, capture, or forcible restriction, but he still violates both the rights of the jail and his own human rights. He can exercise all of his basic rights, even if he is physically imprisoned. When a person is found guilty of a crime and subsequently deprived of their freedom in accordance with the legal process, they nonetheless possess all of their fundamental rights.
The Apex Court gave a broad interpretation of inmates’ rights and instituted remedial action to safeguard such rights. The police and jail authorities are not that much trained to take the rights of prisoners in strict manner because the lack of implementation.
Gauri Gupta
Post-Graduated (LL.M.)
Hidayatullah National Law University, Raipur
[1] M.P. v S. Shyamsynder Trivedi (1994) SCC 395
[2] Sec. 3(2) of The Prisons Act, 1894
[3] “A.D.M. Jabalpur v. Shivkant Shukla” (1976) SC 1207
[4] Hussainara Khatoon V State of Bihar, (1979) SCR (3) 532
[5] CHAUHAN, Rights of Prisoners Under Indian Laws, LEGAL SERVICE INDIA
[6] AVINASH PRADHAN, “A STUDY ON THE PROTECTION OF PRISONER’S HUMAN RIGHTS IN INDIA”, SHODGANGA,2015
[7] Sreedev KrishnaKumar, “77 percent of India’s prisoners are undertrials: NCRB”, Money Control, https://www.moneycontrol.com/news/india/77-percent-of-indias-prisoners-are-undertrials-ncrb-9142041.html, Sept. 07, 2022
[8] Article 20 of Indian Constitution
[9] Francis Coralie Mullin v Administrator, Union Territory of Delhi (1981) 746
[10] Maneka Gandhi v Union of India (1978) 597
[11] “D.K. Basu V State of West Bengal” (1996)
[12] Baljeet Kaur, Prisoners ‘Right to Write (2019) https://www.epw.in/engage/article/prisoners-right-write-why-sc-rulings-should-be-considered#:~:text=ii)%20A%20prisoner%20can%20write,his%20writings%20for%20publication%20outside.&text=iv)%20A%20prisoner%20can%20write,contents%20of%20a%20prisoner’s%20writings.
[13] Anita, Prisoners’ Rights in India: An Analysis of Legal Framework, 6 INDIAN JOURNAL OF LAW AND JUSTICE 135(2015).
[14] D.K. Basu v State of West Bengal (1997) 1 SCC 416
[15] Hussainara Khatoon v Home Secretary, State of Bihar 1980 AIR 1369
[16] Khatri v State of Bihar 1981 SCR (2) 408
[17] Sunil Batra v Delhi Administration (1978) 4 SCC 409
[18] Charles Sobhraj v Superintendent, Central Jail (1978) SC 1514