What's New

Caste-based Discrimination in Indian Prisons

Syllabus:

• GS – 2 – Caste system in India, Prison reforms

Why in News

• In October 2023, the Supreme Court of India declared such caste-based divisions of labor unconstitutional, providing much-needed reform to these outdated practices.

Focus :

• This article explores the deep-rooted caste-based discrimination prevalent in Indian prison systems, tracing its colonial origins and examining current prison manuals that perpetuate inequality. It critically analyses the Supreme Court’s recent judgment declaring caste-based labour division in prisons unconstitutional. The article also outlines the court’s directives for reforms and the broader implications for prison management and social justice.

Introduction:

• India’s prison system, which still follows many colonial-era practices, has long been criticized for its discriminatory provisions, particularly those rooted in caste divisions.
• These provisions allocate work to prisoners based on their caste, a practice that violates the principles of equality enshrined in the Indian Constitution.
• This article delves into the historical context of caste-based discrimination in prisons, examines the provisions of state prison manuals, and explores the Supreme Court’s ruling and its implications for the future of prison reform in India.

Historical Context: Colonial Roots of Caste-based Prison Practices

1.Colonial-era Stereotypes: Criminal Tribes Act, 1871

• The British colonial regime introduced the Criminal Tribes Act, 1871, which categorized certain marginalized communities as “criminal tribes” based on the stereotype that they were “born criminals.”
• Even after the Act was repealed, prison manuals continued to treat denotified tribes as “habitual offenders” without any prior conviction.

2.Caste-based Labor Division in Prisons

• The caste-based division of labor, as seen in prison manuals, traces its origins back to colonial policies that associated certain castes with specific types of work, perpetuating inequality. For example:
  • “Mehtars” or Scheduled Castes were assigned menial tasks like cleaning latrines.
  • Brahmins and higher castes were assigned to kitchen duties.
• These practices were formalized in state prison manuals, which codified discriminatory caste-based labor systems.

Caste-based Discrimination in Prison Manuals

1.Provisions in State Prison Manuals

• Several state prison manuals, such as those in Uttar Pradesh, Tamil Nadu, and West Bengal, still enforce caste-based labor assignments. Notable examples include:
  • Tamil Nadu’s Palayamkottai Central Jail, where castes like Thevars, Nadars, and Pallars are segregated in different sections of the prison.
  • Rajasthan Prison Rules, 1951, which mandated that Scheduled Castes like “Mehtars” perform sanitation tasks, while high-caste prisoners were designated for cooking.

2.Reinforcement of Colonial Stereotypes

• Provisions like Rule 404 of the West Bengal Jail Code prevent individuals from being appointed as convict overseers if they belong to “wandering tribes,” reinforcing colonial stereotypes that certain communities have a “natural tendency to escape.”

3.Definition of ‘Habitual Offenders’

• Prison manuals in states like Andhra Pradesh, Tamil Nadu, and Kerala define “habitual criminals” using broad and stereotypical categories, often targeting marginalized communities without evidence of prior convictions.

Violation of Constitutional Rights

1.Contravention of Article 14: Right to Equality

• The caste-based division of labor in prisons violates Article 14 of the Constitution, which guarantees equality before the law.
• The Supreme Court ruled that using caste as a criterion for classification does not benefit the victims of caste discrimination but instead perpetuates inequality and social division.

2.Violation of Article 15(1): Prohibition of Discrimination

• Assigning menial tasks to prisoners from marginalized castes while assigning higher-skilled work to prisoners from higher castes constitutes direct discrimination under Article 15(1), which prohibits discrimination based on caste.

3.Violation of Article 17: Prohibition of Untouchability

• Practices like requiring food to be cooked by members of a “suitable caste” or assigning menial duties to specific castes based on “custom” amount to untouchability, a practice explicitly prohibited under Article 17.

4.Violation of Article 21: Right to Life and Dignity

• The prison manuals’ discriminatory provisions restrict the reformation of marginalized prisoners, violating their right to life and dignity under Article 21. Such provisions deprive prisoners of their fundamental right to be treated with respect and equality.

Supreme Court Verdict: A Landmark Judgment

1.Supreme Court’s Observations

• The Supreme Court’s October 2023 judgment declared caste-based labor divisions in prisons unconstitutional and ordered their immediate abolition.
• The Court stated that caste-based discrimination in prison manuals violates fundamental rights and perpetuates colonial-era inequalities that should have been eradicated long ago.

2.Directives for State and Union Governments

• The Court directed all States and Union Territories to amend their prison manuals within three months to remove discriminatory provisions.
• The Union government’s Model Prison Manual, 2016 was also criticized for its vague definition of “habitual offender,” leading to its directive for necessary reforms in both the 2016 manual and the Model Prisons and Correctional Services Act, 2023.

3.Role of District Legal Services Authorities

• To ensure compliance with the Court’s orders, district legal services authorities and boards of visitors were tasked with monitoring prison reforms and the implementation of the new provisions.

Implications of the Verdict for Prison Reforms

1.End of Caste-based Discrimination in Prisons-The judgment sets a precedent for ending caste-based discrimination in prisons across India, ensuring that all prisoners, regardless of caste, are treated equally and with dignity.

2.Impact on Prison Management-Prison administrations must now implement the necessary reforms, such as abolishing caste-based labor divisions and providing equal opportunities for all prisoners to engage in skilled, dignified work.

Challenges and the Way Forward

• Resistance to Change-One of the primary challenges to implementing the reforms will be resistance from within prison administrations, which have long followed these discriminatory practices.
• Political Will and Social Awareness–Effective implementation of the Supreme Court’s directives requires strong political will, awareness campaigns, and training programs for prison staff to ensure compliance with the new rules.
• Need for Accountability Mechanisms-Regular monitoring by independent bodies, such as district legal services authorities and boards of visitors, is essential to hold prison authorities accountable for the timely and effective implementation of reforms.

Conclusion:

• The Supreme Court’s ruling marks a pivotal moment in addressing the caste-based discrimination entrenched in India’s prison systems, a relic of colonial-era policies.
• The Court’s directives for immediate reforms offer hope for a more equitable and humane prison system that respects the constitutional rights of all prisoners.
• However, the success of these reforms will depend on the political will of state governments, effective monitoring mechanisms, and a broader social commitment to eradicating caste-based inequalities in every sphere of life, including prisons.

Associated Article

https://universalinstitutions.com/tag/prisonreform/

Mains UPSC Question GS 2

• “The division of labor in Indian prisons based on caste perpetuates colonial-era discrimination and violates the fundamental rights of prisoners. In light of recent judicial interventions, critically analyze the legal and social implications of such practices, and discuss the reforms required to ensure equality in prison administration.”(250 words).