BREAKING| End Caste-Based Allotment Of Work To Prisoners, Delete Caste Column In Prison Registers : Supreme Court

The Supreme Court today (October 3) laid down crucial guidelines for the prevention of segregation and division of labour solely on the basis of the caste of the prisoners in Prisons.

The Court struck down the provisions of the Prison Manuals of several States as per which jobs were assigned to prisons on the basis of their castes. The Court held that assigning cleaning and sweeping to the marginalised castes and assigning cooking to higher-caste prisoners is nothing but a direct caste discrimination and a violation of Article 15.

Provisions allowing for caste-based segregation violate Articles 14, 15, 17, 21 and 23 of the Constitution. Such division of labour is an aspect of untouchability, the Court ruled.

The Court took objection to the provisions of the UP Prison Manual which provided that a person going under simple imprisonment need not be given menial work unless his caste is used to do such jobs. "We hold that no group are born as scavenger class or to do or not do menial jobs or as alasses who can cook and who cannot cook...these are aspects of untouchability which cannot be permitted," the Court observed in the judgment.

The Court also flagged the provisions of the Rajasthan prison manual which referred to denotified tribes.

"Segregating prisoners on the basis of caste will reinforce caste discrimination... segregation will not facilitate rehabilitation..Not providing dignity to prisoners is a relic of the colonial system. Even prisoners are entitled to the right to dignity. They are to be treated humanely and without cruelty. Prison system must be considerate to the physical and mental health of the prisoners, " CJI DY Chandrachud said reading out the judgment.

A bench of Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud and Justices JB Pardiwala, Manoj Misra was pronouncing the judgment in a PIL filed by journalist Sukanya Shanta based on her article published in The Wire.

The Court directed all States and Union Territories to revise their prison manuals to end caste-based allotment of work. The Court also directed the Union Government to make necessary changes in its Model Prison Rules to address caste-based segregation. The Court further directed that the reference to habitual offenders in the prison manuals should be in accordance with the legislative definitions, without reference to their caste or tribe.

Importantly, the Court also directed that the caste columns in prison registers must be deleted.

Before pronouncing the judgment, CJI Chandrachud said that it was a "beautifully researched petition" and congratulated the lawyers for arguing the matter effectively.

"Ma'am Sukanya Shanta, thank you for writing that well written piece, it highlights the power of citizens, they write well researched articles and lead the matters to this Court," CJI said.

Briefly put, the petition was filed by journalist-Sukanya Shantha highlighting discriminatory practices taking place in the prisons of certain states/UTs of India. To elucidate by way of example, she mentioned that the old Uttar Pradesh Prison Manual, 1941 provided for the maintenance of caste prejudices of prisoners and designation of cleaning, conservancy, and sweeping work on caste basis. However, in 2022, amendments were made aligning it with the Model Manual and removing provisions for allotting work based on caste. Despite this change, the 2022 Manual continued to uphold a rule related to the preservation of caste prejudice and segregation of habitual offenders.

The Petition highlights identical discriminatory laws within the State Prison Manual of 13 major states including Rajasthan, Madhya Pradesh, Orissa, Uttar Pradesh, Tamil Nadu, Delhi, Punjab, Bihar, Maharashtra, etc.

Arguments By The Petitioner

Senior Advocate S Muralidhar and Advocate Disha Wadekar appeared for Shantha and argued that the discrimination was taking place in three ways: (i) through division of manual labor; (ii) through segregation of barracks on caste lines; (iii) through extant provisions in state prison manuals which discriminate against prisoners belonging to de-notified tribes (referred to as criminal or wandering and nomadic tribes in the manuals) and “habitual offenders”.

Besides the above, it was contended that the Model Prison Manual was inadequate insofar as there was a need to address caste-based discrimination in Indian prisons. The counsels further pointed out that they had placed on record testimonials from undertrials (past and present), detailing their experiences of the discriminatory practices.

Sr Adv Muralidhar, in particular, drew the court's attention to an advisory issued by the Union to states/UTs in February, 2024 to address the issue of caste-based discrimination. He pointed out that in the replies filed by some of the states, there was an admission of the discriminatory practices and the same were sought to be justified.

Arguments By The Respondents

Additional Solicitor General Aishwarya Bhati (for Union), on the other hand, urged that prisons being a state subject, the Union can do nothing more than issuing an Advisory, unless the court directs that it monitor compliance and report back.

A counsel for State of Uttar Pradesh also submitted before the court that the state had filed its reply containing provisions from its prison manual as well as stating that there was no caste-based discrimination taking place in the prisons. The submission was however countered by Sr Adv Muralidhar, pointing to one of the provisions: "your Lordships may see [Rule] 289...it's really disturbing...'a convict sentenced to simple imprisonment shall not be called upon to perform duties of degrading character unless he belongs to a class or community accustomed to perform such duties'...what kind of reply is this? It does not even mention Rule 289".

Case Title: Sukanya Shantha v. Union of India, W.P.(C) No. 1404/2023