- The Supreme Court indicated its intention to ask the Union Home Ministry to intervene with States to overhaul prison manuals and eliminate existing caste-based discrimination practices among prisoners.
| State Subject ‘Prisons’/’persons detained therein’ is a “State-List” subject under Entry 4 of List II of the Seventh Schedule to the Constitution of India. Administration and management of prisons and prisoners is the responsibility of respective State Governments who are competent to take appropriate action in this regard. However, given the significance of prisons in the Criminal Justice System, the Ministry of Home Affairs has been providing regular guidance and support on diverse issues relating to prison administration. |
- Despite denials from States like Uttar Pradesh, the court read from prison documents using terms such as “scavenger class.”
- One document noted that convicts serving simple imprisonment wouldn’t perform menial duties unless they belonged to a class “accustomed” to such work.
- In Madhya Pradesh, convicts from denotified tribes are automatically viewed as habitual criminals.
- Earlier the court found that prison manuals in over 10 States, including Uttar Pradesh, West Bengal, Odisha, Maharashtra, Tamil Nadu, and Kerala, still contained provisions sanctioning caste-based discrimination and forced labour in prisons.
- Caste discrimination persists inside prisons, with labour segregated by caste.
- Modern reforms have not penetrated prison walls, with Dalits even having separate wards.
- The Rajasthan Prison Rules, 1951, assigned Mehtars to latrines while Brahmins were assigned to kitchens.
- In Tamil Nadu, Thevars, Nadars, and Pallars were allotted different sections in Palayamkottai Central Jail, exemplifying caste-based segregation of barracks.
- The court emphasized the need to repeal these discriminatory provisions in prison manuals.
Dig Deeper: Read about the Model Prison Manual, 2016 in the context of recent reforms in Criminal Administration and Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita.
