Caste bias in Jails

Useful in: GS-II-Social Justice

• Context:The supreme court recently struck down a bunch of rules in several state prison manuals, saying they "reinforce caste differences" and target members of marginalised communities, especially those dubbed as "criminal tribes" in the colonial era. These rules violated the fundamental rights of the prisoners.

• The term "Criminal Tribes" refers to communities that were historically stigmatised and labelled as "criminal" by the British colonial government in India.
• The Criminal Tribes Act of 1871 allowed the British Raj to declare any community as a "criminal tribe" if its members were deemed to be "addicted to systematic commission of non-bailable offences"
• As a result, members of these communities were subject to severe restrictions, surveillance, and discrimination based on stereotypical assumptions about "born criminals", including the threat of arrest without a warrant.
• They were often forced into settlements, monitored, and were required to register with the police.
• This labelling continued until India gained independence. In 1952, the Indian government repealed the Criminal Tribes Act, and the communities were "denotified," leading them to be referred to as Denotified Tribes (DNTs).

• They are also known as 'Vimukt Jatis. These communities are among the most vulnerable and disadvantaged.
• Denotified communities, once labelled as 'born criminals' during British rule under laws like the Criminal Tribes Act, 1871.
• A few of these communities which were listed as de-notified were also nomadic.

• Nomadic and semi-nomadic communities are defined as those who move from one place to another rather than living in one place all the time.
• Historically, Nomadic Tribes and De-notified Tribes never had access to private land or home ownership.
• While most DNTs are spread across the Scheduled Castes (SC), Scheduled Tribes (ST) and Other Backward Classes (OBC) categories, some DNTs are not covered in any of the SC, ST or OBC categories.

• The day-to-day administration of prisons is governed by the Prisons Act and Prison Manual in the state or Union Territory Concerned.
• The rules in question deal with the classification of prisoners, and the prison work that is assigned to them.
• The court said the manuals assigned prison work in ways that "perpetuate caste-based labour division and reinforce social hierarchies".

• Madhya Pradesh Jail Manual, 1987, prisoners from the Mehtar caste a Scheduled Caste community - are specifically assigned the work of cleaning the latrines.
• West Bengal Jail Code Rules, 1967, Rule 741 dealing with 'Sickness in cells' states: "Food shall be cooked and carried to the cells by prisoner- cooks of suitable caste, under the superin- tendence of a jail officer".
• Andhra Pradesh, Tamil Nadu, and Kerala Prison Manuals: These manuals define "habitual criminals" as those who, by "habit," engage in crimes like robbery, housebreaking, theft, forgery, or extortion-even without prior convictions.

• Tamil Nadu Prison: The segregation of Thevars, Nadars, and Pallars into separate w sections at the Palayamkottai Central Jail in Tamil Nadu were a caste-based segregation of barracks.
• Rajasthan Prison: The Rajasthan Prison Rules, 1951, assigned latrine duties to the "Mehtar" caste, a Scheduled Caste community, while Brahmins or high-caste Hindu prisoners were placed in kitchens

• According to this, the state shall not deny to any person equality before the law or equal protection of the laws within the territory of India.
• However, there are cases where the state can make classifications and treat different groups differently if the classification is reasonable.
• For this to be valid, the classification must satisfy two conditions:
  • Intelligible Differentia: Classification should be based on a discernible difference.
  • Rational Nexus: The classification must have a legitimate purpose in line with the law's goal.
• The court held that caste can only be used as a ground for classification "as long as it is used to grant benefits to the victims of caste discrimination", and would otherwise "reinforce caste differences or animosity that ought to be prevented at the first place".
• This would deny some incarcerated individuals "equal opportunity to be assessed for their correctional needs, and consequently, opportunity to reform".
• The classification on obsolete understanding of caste, based on pre-constitutional legislations and practices, lacks a rational nexus.

• Article 15(1):Caste can not be a ground to discriminate against members of marginalised castes.
• To differentiate between inmates on the basis of "habit", "custom", "superior mode of living", and "natural tendency to escape", etc is unconstitutionally vague and indeterminate The court held that the manuals both directly and indirectly discriminated against marginalised communities directly through the assignment of tasks such as cleaning and sweeping to the marginalised castes, and cooking to the "forward" castes, and indirectly by perpetuating the stereotype that "people from these communities are either incapable of or unfit for more skilled, dignified, or intellectual work".

• The court referred to an Uttar Pradesh rule that allows convicts to perform "duties of a degrading or menial character if they belong to "a class or community accustomed to perform such duties".
• In this regard, the court held that "the notion that an occupation is considered as "degrading or menial" is an aspect of the caste system and untouchability".

• The Supreme Court held that the right to life with dignity under Article 21 "envisages the growth of individual personality" and "provides for the right to overcome caste barriers as a part of the right to life of individuals from marginalised communities".
• Some rules in the prison manuals, however, "restrict the reformation of prisoners from marginalised communities" and "deprive prisoners from marginalised groups of a sense of dignity and the expectation that they should be treated equally", violating this right, it held. The top court also condemned practices where marginalised prisoners were forced to clean sewers and tanks in hazardous conditions, calling it a clear violation of human dignity.

• The court held that "imposing labour or work, which is considered impure or low-grade, upon the members of marginalised communities amounts to "forced labour" under Article 23". The court declared that Prohibition of Employment as Manual Scavengers and their Rehabilitation Act has a binding effect even on prisons. In relation to toilets, manual scavenging or hazardous cleaning of a sewer or a septic tank inside a prison shall not be permitted.

• Amend Prison Manuals: All States and Union Territories were ordered to revise their prison manuals and rules within three months to eliminate discriminatory practices.
• Removal of Caste References: The court mandated the removal of the "caste column" and any references to caste from the registers of undertrials and convicts maintained in prisons.
• Issues in Model Prison Manual and Act: The Union government's Model Prison Manual, 2016, and the Model Prisons and Correctional Services Act, 2023, were flagged for shortcomings such as caste discrimination.
  • The 2016 manual was particularly criticised for its vague definition of "habitual offender," allowing States to perpetuate stereotypes against denotified tribes.
• Compliance Monitoring:District legal services authorities and boards of visitors were tasked with conducting regular inspections to ensure compliance with these directives.
• Police Instructions: olice authorities were instructed not to arbitrarily arrest members of denotified tribes, ensuring adherence to guidelines established in previous Supreme Court rulings.
  • The bench called for strict adherence to guidelines laid down in Arnesh Kumar Vs State of Bihar (2014) and Amanatullah Khan Vs Commissioner of Police, Delhi (2024) case to prevent arbitrary arrest of denotified tribe members.

• Justice Mulla committee 1983: It recommended
  • Improved prison accommodations.
  • Creation of the Indian Prisons and Correctional Services,
  • Public and media visits for transparency,
  • Reduction of under-trial prisoners through expedited trials.
  • A national policy on prisons.
  • Using alternatives to imprisonment, such as community service, etc.
• Justice V.R. Krishna lyer committee 1987:
  • Induction of more women into the police force.
  • Separate institutions with women employees alone, especially for women offenders.
  • Necessary provisions to restore the dignity of convicted women.
• Justice Amitav Roy panel (2018) of the SC:
  • It recommended several prison reforms - special fast track courts, improvements in lawyer-prisoners ratio, use of video-conferencing for trial, etc.
• Provisions of the Model Prisoners Act of 2023:
  • Legal aid to prisoners: It is the state's duty to provide free legal aid by suitable legislation or schemes.
  • Parole: It is a form of early release for prison inmates where the prisoner agrees to abide by behavioural conditions.
  • Furlough: It is the right of prisoners to retain family and social ties. This also helps them counter the ill effects of prolonged time spent in prison.
  • Other provisions: Special facilities for women and transgender prisoners, Provisions for use of technology in prison administration, etc.

• The Supreme Court's recent ruling to abolish these discriminatory practices marks a significant step towards achieving substantive equality in prisons. By mandating the removal of caste references, revising outdated definitions, and addressing biases against marginalised communities, the court has reinforced the importance of dignity, fairness, and reform for all prisoners. This decision paves the way for a more just and inclusive correctional framework in India.