Unshackling prisons from caste prejudice

PRISONS are a microcosm of society, reflecting the disparities that prevail in it. A parallel world exists in prisons. It operates on the basis of both written rules framed by the State in the prison manuals and unwritten codes of the inmates and the staff.

In India, prison is a state subject and each state has framed its own rules and regulations. The colonial legacy in terms of the Prison Act of 1894 is reflected in the prison manuals. While dehumanising practices such as whipping, mentioned in the Prison Act, had been declared unconstitutional, derogatory practices related to the distribution of work on caste basis still persist in prison manuals.

The Supreme Court has, over the years, delivered significant judgments on prison-related matters that have ushered in reforms. It was in the Sunil Batra case in 1978 that the SC held for the first time that a person in prison does not become a ‘non-person’ and retains all human rights, except within the limitations of imprisonment. It was affirmed that the prisoners have a right to live with dignity.

In its latest judgment in the case of Sukanya Shantha vs Union of India, the SC has directed the Union and state governments to ensure an end to the caste-based discrimination in prisons. Sukanya had highlighted how caste identities governed prison labour assignments, segregation in barracks and discriminatory treatment towards prisoners belonging to denotified tribes and habitual offenders. The apex court held that these provisions violate Articles 14, 15, 17, 21 and 23 of the Constitution. It declared that “the right to dignity is not forfeited upon incarceration”. Caste-based bias within jails strips prisoners of their dignity.

Nearly 17 states will need to make the necessary changes in their manuals. The SC has asked the Centre to modify its Model Prisons Rules to address caste-based segregation.

Prisoners come from multiple vulnerable groups, ranging from Dalits to tribals and religious and ethnic minorities. The discrimination and marginalisation are further perpetuated and even embedded inside the prison.

The SC held that the practice of assigning labour based on caste, where Dalits and members of denotified tribes were forced into menial tasks, such as cleaning toilets, must cease immediately. For instance, the Madhya Pradesh jail manual states that ‘Mehtar prisoners’ are responsible for handling human excreta in the toilets. Those who are at the bottom of the societal class pyramid would be required to do the menial work and those higher up would get other work, like legal documentation.

While prisoners do get paid for the work, it is a paltry sum in many states. Remission is also earned by the convict inmates who work in the prison and the performance of maintenance work earns more remission. But who gets to do what work may be at the discretion of prison staff. The SC has declared that all labour assignments should be made on the basis of equality and non-discrimination.

"Prisons should not be spaces where historical wrongs are perpetuated. They must embody reform, rehabilitation and, most important, equality."

The SC held that the provisions which allow for classification and segregation based on caste are unconstitutional. The states have been directed to do away with the provisions in prison manuals that perpetuate discrimination based on caste within three months and file compliance reports. The "caste" column and any references to the caste of jailed undertrials or convicted prisoners' registers inside the jails should be "deleted", it ordered.

It is not for the first time that the right to equality has been found to be violated in various manuals and practices. It is a known fact that the highest class people get treated well everywhere, even in jail.

Notably, the Punjab Jail Manual of 1996 made a distinction between ‘better-class’ and ‘ordinary-class’ prisoners on the basis of social status and education as well as whether the inmate was accustomed to a superior mode of living. ‘Better-class’ inmates got to stay in separate wards with furniture, had a separate kitchen and better diet and were not required to do menial tasks. Courts would recommend the classification for ‘better-class’ facilities.

This was struck down by the Punjab and Haryana High Court in 2000. However, the practice continued even after the judgment. The manual was superseded by the Punjab Prison Rules 2021.

In 2023, Haryana came up with new Prison Rules that prohibit classification on the basis of status, caste and religion.

The United Nations’ Standard Minimum Rules for Treatment of Prisoners, ie the Nelson Mandela Rules, and the Bangkok Rules for the treatment of women prisoners prohibit discrimination on the grounds of race, colour, gender, religion and social status.

These rules, along with the apex court judgments on prisons, had formed the basis of the Model Prison Manual 2016. As a member of the committee that framed this, we had specifically prohibited any special treatment to prisoners belonging to any particular caste or religion. The classification of prisoners is to be done scientifically and not on the basis of socioeconomic status, caste or class.

The Model Prison Act 2023, prepared by the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA), does not contain any reference to the prohibition of caste-based discrimination. The SC has asked for the provision to be incorporated in it. The MHA advisory of February 2024 told the states to take immediate steps to amend/remove the discriminatory provision in their state prison manual/ prison Act.

To ensure compliance with these directives, the SC has ordered that the state governments submit periodic reports detailing the steps taken to revise their prison manuals and implement the SC directions. The District Legal Services Authorities and the Board of Visitors set up under the Model Prison Manual 2016 have been directed to jointly carry out inspections to ascertain whether caste-based bias or discriminatory practices, as pointed out in the verdict, are being practised inside prisons.

However, as BR Ambedkar, in his classic essay ‘Annihilation of Caste’ (1936), observed: “Constitutional morality is not a natural sentiment. It has to be cultivated.” We remain a socially stratified society, still entrenched in a social order where equality remains a dream for many. Systematic caste-based discrimination in all spaces needs to be identified. Challenging the comforting routines and patterns of behaviour that may appear to be the natural order of things requires much unlearning at individual, societal and institutional levels.

Views are personal