Corporal Punishment In Prisons Unconstitutional, 'State Sponsored Terrorism': PIL In Delhi High Court

A public interest litigation has been moved before Delhi High Court challenging various provisions of the Prisons Act, 1894, that relate to corporal punishment of inmates for acts of indiscipline. The plea argues the provisions are ultra vires of Articles 14, 19(1)(a), 20(2) and 21 of the Constitution of India.

A division bench of Chief Justice Satish Chandra Sharma and Justice Subramonium Prasad listed the matter for hearing on May 23 along with a similar PIL against the punishment of solitary confinement to prisoners.

Both PILs have been moved by Advocate Harsh Vibhore Singhal.

The petition submits that corporal punishment of inmates is “degrading, demeaning and sadistically cruel” and thus, is unconstitutional.

“Unfortunately, increasing inhumanity of corporal punishment has reduced criminal jurisprudence to a meaningless hollow discourse and absent therefrom is any acknowledgement of the actual day-to-day experience facing inmates, or a suggestion that, although corporal punishments can be degrading, they need not be,” it states.

It has further been submitted that the impugned provisions under the Prisoners Act make jail inmates vulnerable to corporal punishments and are disproportionate to any legitimate objective.

“Can a prisoner be whipped 30 times across his buttocks drawing skin, blood and tissue? Can he be made to wear ignominious clothes of gunny or coarse fabric, suffer food deprivations (penal diet) for 96 hours etc.?”, the PIL states.

"That whipping is depraved, barbaric and wanton infliction of pain. This is state sponsored terrorism and a blot on India’s hobbled path towards human rights and for justiciable and humane treatment of prisoners."

It has been submitted that corporal punishment gravely infringes prisoners’ human and fundamental rights, is dehumanizing and degrading and gets compounded by the “derisive sadistic laughter of obstreperous and vituperative prison masters” supervising such punishments.

The plea also seeks a direction that every State be asked to review and update its prison manual and that the provisions providing powers of inflicting corporal and other forms of punishments to prison authorities be set aside.

It also seeks setting up of a Prison Punishment Tribunal, suitably comprised of officials as may be determined by such government, including at least a sitting judge of the concerned High Court, for adjudicating prison offences and giving punishments.

Title: Harsh Vibhore Singhal v. Union of India