Supreme Court strikes down caste-based discrimination in prison manuals

It also directed the states to amend their prison manuals within three months.

New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Thursday, October 3 set aside caste-based discriminatory provisions of prison manuals of around 11 states while deprecating the practice of distribution of work and segregation of prisoners in separate wards based on their castes.

“State has a positive obligation to prevent such discriminations,” a bench comprising Chief Justice D Y Chandrachud and Justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra held while issuing a slew of directions to abolish caste-based discrimination inside jails.

It also directed the states to amend their prison manuals within three months.

“All such provisions are held to be unconstitutional. All the states are directed to make changes (in prison manuals) by the judgment…

“The references to habitual offenders shall be about the habitual offender legislations and all such references of habitual offenders in state prison manuals are declared as unconstitutional if they are based on castes,” the CJI said while pronouncing the verdict in a packed courtroom.

The top court also took suo motu (on its own) cognizance of the instances of caste-based discrimination inside prisons and directed the apex court registry to list it with a title of ‘In re: Discrimination Inside Prisons” after three months.

It asked states to submit a compliance report of the judgment.

At the outset, the CJI said the PIL challenged the provisions of state prison manuals on the grounds of them being discriminatory.

The CJI said there are divisions of manual labor, and barracks inside jails in some states based on the identity of the prisoners.

“We have said that the criminal laws of the colonial era impact even the post-colonial period…the constitutional laws must uphold equality and dignity of citizens,” he said.

“We have also dealt (in the judgment) with the concept of emancipation, equality, and the fight against caste-based discrimination and said it cannot be won overnight,” he said.

This court is contributing to the ongoing struggle against caste-based discrimination and the judgment has dealt with aspects of non-discrimination under Article 14 (right to equality) under the Constitution, the CJI said.

Based on the analysis of the judgment certain anti-discrimination principles emerge and such instances can be both “direct, indirect” and stereotypes they can further such discriminations, he said.

“State has a positive obligation to prevent the same and the courts have to adjudicate claims of indirect and systemic discrimination…Not providing dignity to prisoners is a relic of the colonial period where they were dehumanized and the Constitution mandates that prisoners have to be treated humanely and the prison system must be aware of the mental and physical state of prisoners,” the judgment said.

The verdict said the states would be held liable if the prisoners were being made to do inhuman work and treated inhumanely.

Also Read
Police reforms: Telangana HC issues notices to CS, DGP & Home secy

“Hatred and contempt towards the castes showed inherent and pervasive bias towards such castes. The colonial history indicates that social hierarchy was imbibed in their administration,” the CJI said.

Discrimination against the Scheduled Castes (SCs), Scheduled Tribes (STs), and the de-notified tribes have continued and the courts have to ensure there is the implementation of protective legislation and ensure that marginalized people do not suffer, the judgment said.

“We have held that the Constitution recognizes that SCs, STs for protective discrimination….castes cannot be used to discriminate against the marginalised ones,” the CJI said.

There cannot be such discrimination between prisoners and their segregation based on their castes will not lead to their rehabilitation and such a practice does not survive the test of “intelligible differentia”, the verdict said.

“We have held that assigning cleaning and sweeping work to marginalised and assigning cooking to higher caste is nothing but a violation of Article 15 (it forbids discrimination on grounds of religion, race, caste, gender, or place of birth or any of them),” the CJI said.

The bench referred to a Uttar Pradesh law that provides that a person undergoing simple imprisonment will not work in degrading and menial work unless his caste is used to do such jobs.

“We hold that no group is born as a scavenger class or to do or not do menial jobs. The classes who can cook and who cannot cook are aspects of untouchability which cannot be permitted….Sweepers should be chosen from ‘chandal’ caste is nothing but entirely opposed to substantive equality and a facet of institutional discrimination.

“The prisoners shall not be permitted to undertake cleaning of sewers tanks in hazardous conditions,” it said while ordering that the police will have to work in earnest to deal with the cases of caste-based discrimination.

The bench said prisoners of certain classes will have the right to get a fair distribution of work in jails.

The apex court had in January this year sought responses from the Centre and 11 states, including Uttar Pradesh and West Bengal, on a plea filed by Sukanya Shantha, a native of Kalyan in Maharashtra.

The plea referred to the Kerala Prison Rules and said they lay down a distinction between a habitual and a re-convicted convict, holding those who are by habit a robber, house breaker, dacoit, or thief should be classified and separated from other convicts.