Prison Reforms in India: Policies v/s Practices
PRISON REFORMS IN INDIA: POLICIES v. PRACTICE
- Shachi Gambhir, National Law University, Odisha
Great Hindu scholars like Brihaspati commended and pushed for imprisonment of offenders. Serving punishment for an offence was considered extremely vital and was laid great stress on. It was believed since then that keeping the prisoners in solitary confinement give an opportunity to self-introspect which in turn led to reformation in the offenders. During the Hindu and Mughal rule, offenders were kept under strict supervision and the main objective was to deter the offenders and the general public from repeating the crime and committing the crime respectively and hence, imprisonment and jail time played a vital role. However, Manu frowned upon the same due to inhuman treatment of the inmates.
India inherited its prison system from the colonial rule by the British. The British Raj in India has had a great impact on the status of prisons in India, today. During the British Raj, prisons were used as a political tool that helped suppressing opposition and criticism simply by sentencing the opponent, freedom fighter to serve a few years in custody. Freedom fighters and political opponents were labelled as a “threat” and put away for years without proper trials and legal recourse. Penal reforms in India began since the colonial rule in India. Since then, India has made several reforms both on administrative and legislative levels. However, a deficiency is suspected at the implementation stage which has led to a huge gap between policies and practice of the said reforms. [1]
In most States of India, prisons are facing issues such as overcrowding, discrimination, inhuman treatment, corruption, inequality, sanitation and food related problems, etc. The issues of Prison reform came into light during the early 80s when KF Rustamji, only police official of our country awarded Padma Vibhushan highlighted the poor conditions of prisons in India and led his experience in the reformation of police and prisons. Just after the emergency period ended, a new era of PIL was born where the tormented conscience of a few people adopted an individual’s suffering who voiced the suffering of the weak. The Maneka Gandhi[2] judgement laid down procedures for a ‘fair, reasonable, and a just’, trial which sprouted a seed for liberal interpretation of statues.
Owing to the great deeds of KF Rustamji, a PIL in the name of Hussainara Khatoon v. State of Bihar[3]was filed against illegal detention and for the implementation of speedy trials. His painstaking efforts led to the release of about 40,000 prisoners that were under trail. The Sunil Batra case[4]&[5]in the year 1978 was decided against solitary confinements, legal aid was laid great stress on in the case of Hoskot.[6] Usage of handcuffs on arrested persons were barred unless the court grants permission in the case of Prem Shankar Jha. [7] In the year 1981, custodial violence was said to be hazardous and emphasis was laid on the same in the case of Bhagalpur. [8] Solitary confinement, excessive labor, decrease in quantity of food and punitive cells were made illegal in the year 1981 as ruled by the Rakesh Kaushik case.[9]This was the first wave towards the reforms in prison.
The second wave of the same came after the establishment of two committees to look into the prison reforms in India headed by two retired judges of the Supreme Court. Justice Mullah committee gave several recommendations such as transferring this subject into concurrent list instead of State list as the central government has a very little say in these matters. They also said that a National Policy should be brought on the matter of prisons. It laid great stress on the establishment of a National Commission on Prisons and to introduce a Department of Correctional Services. They considered speedy trial for under trial inmates and a simplified bail process extremely vital. An interesting recommendation by the Mullah committee was to create a separate institution for the young offenders. They recommended that the children below the age of 18 should not be sent to prison with the adult offenders as there might as well be a chance of a bad influence over the young offenders which might turn them into hardened criminals. [10]
Justice VR Krishna Iyer formed a committee on Women Prisoners which recommended for a separate jail for women with women as staff members that has adequate sanitary conditions. To boost the mental health and inculcate reformation among women offenders, Justice Iyer Committee also recommended hosting holistic programs to help the offenders. After this, a high-powered committee was established that used the recommendations of both the above committees under the chairmanship of BPR&D. National Policy was drafted as recommended by Mullah Committee. Novel recommendations too were made by this committee such as posting an officer to deal with legal aid, providing rehabilitation. Some important policies drafted by this Committee was constructing more prisons to avoid crowding, to bring out a manual and uniform law of a certain prison, improvement of living conditions of prisons by the State.[11]
Conditions in the Indian prisons are very poor and they are facing a lot of problems. As Fyodor Dostoyevsky, author of Crime and Punishment, rightly pointed out, “The degree of civilization in a society can be judged by entering its prison” One such problem is serious overcrowding in prisons. Growth in the number of short-term convicts, pre-trail detainees, delay in delivering justice by the courts and the increase in the number of criminal sanctions are a few factors leading to the massive overcrowding of prisons in India. A report by the National Human Rights Commission in the year 2004 stated that in 1315 jails with a maximum capacity of 2,38,855 contained about 95,257 prisoners more than the total capacity and about 70% of these inmates were at a pre-trail stage. As reported by the Times of India in the year 2007, Tihar jail suffered serious issues of overcrowding as it had almost two times more inmates than the sanctioned maximum.
The Asian Legal Resource Centre stated prolonged detention of pre-trail inmates, unhygienic environment and overcrowding are one of the main characteristics of prisons in India. It has also been brought to notice that as a result of overcrowding, there is no barrier between the criminals who have committed major and minor crimes. This particular issue leads to a bad influence on minor offenders. Speedy trials, bails, imposition of fine, releasing the inmates on parole can be a hack to tackle the issue of overcrowding. Looking at this issue through the current scenario where a deadly virus, COVID-19 is spreading through human contact, highly populated prisons might as well become hotspots for the spread of such deadly diseases.
Another pertinent issue in prisons is that of the inhuman treatment of the inmates by the staff members of a prison. There are several instances where human rights violation of prison inmates has taken place. This beats the purpose of prisons as a whole as, prison is a place for reformation and rehabilitation and human rights violation, depriving inmates of their rights will not help in changing the individual and making him fit for the society. Just because prisoners have broken rules or committed crimes doesn’t mean that their rights are of no value at all. Quoting Mahatma Gandhi, “Hate the crime, not the criminal” which means that resistance towards a crime is more fruitful rather than inhuman and indifferent treatment of the criminals by the prison staff.
Health risks in the prison is one worrisome concern as the medical conditions provided to the prisoners is extremely dissatisfactory. Giving and taking bribery by the prison staff too is one such concern that is still prevalent. Despite rules against discrimination, the prisons are said to have had many cases where there was a certain discrimination. Since, the states handle prisons there are allegations wherein affluent and influential politicians have fixated Televisions, air conditioners in the prison.
Existence of prisons dates back to ages with the prime motive to punish the offenders and wrongdoers. Prisons are considered to be an essential part of the criminal justice system. Prisons were to be a place of reformation to the perpetrators. A chance to reform, amend through detention and rigorous isolation from family. However, self-reformation is not possible in such dilapidated conditions. Despite the setting up of committees and introduction of various policies, it is important to note whether such policies have been put to practice. Thus, Prison Reforms in India: Policies v. Practice!
REFERENCES :-
[1] Mazhar Hussain Bhutta & Muhammad Siddique Akbar, ‘Situation of Prisons in India and Pakistan: Shared Legacy, Same Challenges’ [2012] <http://www.antoniocasella.eu/nume/Bhutta_Akbar_prisons_India_Pakistan_2012.pdf> as accessed 12 April 2020
[2] Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India [1978] AIR SC 597
[3] Hussainara Khatoon v. State of Bihar [1979] AIR SC1360,1369,1377, 1819
[4] Sunil Batra v. Delhi Administration [1978] AIR SC 1675
[5] Sunil Batra v. State of Delhi[1980]II SCC 3
[6] Hoskot case [1978]AIR SC 1548
[7] Prem Shankar Jha v. Delhi Administration [1980] AIR SC 1535.
[8] Bhagalpur (Blinding case): Khatri v. State of Bihar [1981] AIR SC 928
[9] Rakesh Kaushik v. Supdt. Tihar Jail [1981] AIR
[10] PS Bawa, ‘Towards Prison Reforms’ [2000] <https://www.jstor.org/stable/23005498> as accessed 12 April 2020
[11]Vijay Hiremath, ‘Draft Policy on Prison Reforms’ [2008] <https://www.jstor.org/stable/40278901>as accessed 14 April 2020
