PRISONERS RIGHTS Convicts are not by mere reason of the conviction denuded off all the fundamental rights

which they otherwise possess .. Justice V. R. Krishna Iyer1 The need for prison reforms has come into focus during the last few decades. The Supreme Court and the High Court have commented upon the deplorable conditions prevailing inside the prisons, resulting in violation of prisoners rights. Prisoners rights have become an important item in the agenda for prison reforms. This is due essentially to the recognition of two important principles. Firstly, the prisoner is no longer regarded as an object, a war, or a slave of the state, who the law would leave at the prison entrance and who would be condemned to civil death. It is increasingly being recognized that a citizen does not cease to be a citizen just because he has become a prisoner. The Supreme Court has made it very clear in many judgments that except for the fact that the compulsion to live in a prison entails by its own force the deprivation of certain rights, like the right to move freely or to practice a profession of ones choice, a prisoner is otherwise entitled to the basic freedom guaranteed by the Constitution.2 Secondly, the convicted persons go to prisons as punishment and not for punishment. Prison sentence has to be carried out as per Courts orders and no additional punishment can be inflicted by the prison authorities without sanction. Prison authorities have to be, therefore accountable for the manner in which they exercise their custody over persons in their care, specially as regards their wide discretionary powers. DIFFERENT ASPECTS OF PRISONERS RIGHTS The area of prisoners rights embodies in itself a plethora a rights ranging from clean drinking water to right against inhuman treatment; from free legal aid to speedy trial. A few of these crucial rights have been identifies below: Article 21: Protection of Article 21 is well extended to under-trials, prisoners and even to convicts. The Supreme Court held in Maneke Gandhi v. Union of India3 that a prisoner be he a convict, under-trial or a detenu, does not cease to be a human being. Even when lodged in the jail he continues to enjoy all his fundamental rights including the right to life.

Right to Speedy Trial: Though the right to speedy trial is not specifically enumerated in our constitution, the same was held to be part and parcel of right to life and personal liberty in Hussainara Khatoon v. Home Secretary, State of Bihar4. The right of the accused to speedy trial has been reiterated by the apex court time and again. It has been laid down that the right to speedy trial flowing from Article 21 encompasses all the stages, namely the stage of investigation, inquiry, appeal, revision and re-trial.5 The concerns are that the

1 2 3 4 5

Sunil Batra v. Delhi Administration AIR 1978 SC 1675. Charles Shobraj v. Superintendent, Tihar Jail AIR 1978 SC 1514. AIR 1978 SC 597. AIR 1979 SC 1369. A. R. Antulay v. R. S. Nayak AIR 1992 SC 1701.

period of remand and pre-conviction detention should be as short as possible; the anxiety, expense and disturbance to his vocation and peace resulting from a prolonged inquiry or trial should be minimum.

Right to Free Legal Aid: The constitutional obligation to provide free legal services to an indigent accused is upon the State and it does not arise only when the trial commences but also attaches when he is for the first time produced before the Magistrate. In Sheela Barse v. State of Maharahtra6 the Apex court emphasized on the importance of legal assistance to a poor or indigent accused who was arrested and put in jeopardy of his life and personal liberty. The ambit of legal aid includes spreading awareness amongst prisoners about their rights and obligations and sensitizing the prison administration. Right Against Inhuman Treatment Third Degree Methods: The Supreme Court in several cases, has taken a serious note of the inhuman treatment meted to the prisoners and issued directions to prison and police authorities for safeguarding the rights of the prisoners and persons in police lock-up. The incidents of torture, assault, injury and deaths in police custody have been said to be the worst form of human rights violation. Torture flouts the basic rights of the citizens and is an affront to human dignity. It tarnishes the image of any civilized nation. Right Against Custodial Violence: The Supreme Court observed in D. K. Basu v. State of West Bengal7 that torture by police struck a blow at the rule of law. Custodial violence has been held to be a calculated assault on human dignity, perhaps one of the worst crimes in a civilized society. The Apex court has laid down certain basic requirements to be followed in all cases of arrest and detention as a measure to prevent custodial violence. Classification of Prisoners : under-trails should not be kept with the convicts. It was held in Sunil Batra v. Delhi Administration8 that the under-trials should be kept separate from the convicts, the hardened criminals whose guilt had been proved. The practice of keeping them together was observed to be custodial perversity which offended the test of reasonableness in Article 19 and fairness in Article 21. Right against Solitary Confinement: A convict is not wholly denuded of his fundamental rights. Conviction does not reduce him to a non-person whose rights are subject to the whims of prison administration. Imposition of solitary confinement is violative of Article 21. A convict is entitled to move, mix, mingle, talk and share company with co-prisoners. 9 He has the right to socialize with family members and friends subject to any valid prison regulations which must be reasonable.

6 7 8 9

AIR 1983 AC 378. AIR 1997 SC 610 AIR 1980 SC 1579. Sunil Batra v. Delhi Administration AIR 1978 SC 1675.

Common Law Duty of Taking Reasonable Care: It has been held to be a duty of the State to create a climate where members of the society live together and to protect their life, liberty, dignity and worth of an individual which should not be jeopardized or endangered even if he is a prisoner. This duty includes providing a clean environment conducive to reformation process of the prisoner. The biggest challenge is that of over-crowding in jails. It is the root problem that gives birth to several other problems like hygiene, food, clothing, health care etc. Right Against Delayed Execution: Prolonged detention to await the execution of a sentence of death has been held to be unjust, unfair, unreasonable and violative of Article 21. Right Against Bar Fetters: The treatment of a human being which offended human dignity, imposed avoidable torture and reduced the man to the level of a beast would certainly be arbitrary and could be questioned under Articles 21 and 14. In Sunil Batra v. Delhi Administration10 the Apex Court again emphasized on giving a dignified treatment to the prisoners. Putting of bar fetters for an unusually long period without due regard for the safety of the prisoner and the security of the prison would certainly be not justified.

CONCLUSION One of the basic tenets of human rights law is that human rights are inalienable and under no circumstances can any authority take away a persons basic human rights. The fact that this tenet is not made applicable to prisoners is well document. Mere talk of having prison reforms is not sufficient. Concrete action must be taken so that the results can be seen at the grass root level.

10

AIR 1978 SC 1675.