LLM Notes: “Any torture or third-degree methods negate the basic human rights of human dignity and freedom of personal liberty. Discuss the notion of human rights and judicial attitude vis-à-vis these concepts as per Indian law.”

 INTRODUCTION (2-3 marks)

Torture and third-degree methods represent the antithesis of constitutional democracy and civilised governance. These practices—involving deliberate infliction of physical or mental pain by state authorities to extract confessions, obtain information, or intimidate individuals—fundamentally violate the core constitutional protections available to every person under the Indian Constitution. The notion of human dignity and personal liberty are not negotiable commodities or instrumental means to achieve law enforcement objectives; they are constitutional absolutes that cannot be suspended, circumscribed, or justified under any circumstances, no matter how pressing the state interest. The Indian judiciary has evolved a sophisticated framework through dynamic interpretation of Articles 21, 22, and 20 to establish that torture and third-degree methods are unconstitutional, violative of human dignity, destructive of personal liberty, and destructive of the rule of law itself.

Print Page

Bombay HC: Under which circumstances should a prisoner be given lenient punishment for overstaying the furlough leave?

It is no doubt true that the authorities have powers under the relevant Rules referred to hereinabove to deduct 5 days' remission for each day of overstay. However, such power needs to be judiciously exercised and not arbitrarily, taking into consideration the cause for not reporting within the stipulated period. The authorities are also required to see if the cause is legitimate and the prisoner is prevented from returning to the prison within the stipulated period, for such a legitimate cause and if he has made an application well in advance for extension of furlough leave, in such situation, the Jail Authorities are required to take into consideration all these factors and then expected to decide the issue. In the instant case, it is not in dispute that the petitioner while he was released on furlough was required to undergo eye surgery and because of that the petitioner could not report back within the stipulated period. It is also not in dispute that the petitioner made an application/representation to the concerned authorities for extension of furlough leave on this ground, however, the same was rejected by the authorities. In the facts and circumstances of the present case, we are of the considered view that the maximum punishment awarded by the authorities is not proper and we direct the authorities to consider the case of the petitioner on the basis of above referred observations made by us. {Para 6} 

IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY (NAGPUR BENCH)

Criminal Writ Petition No. 475 of 2002

Decided On: 23.01.2003

Kashinath Laxman Ingley Vs. State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Hon'ble Judges/Coram:

D.D. Sinha and S.T. Kharche, JJ.

Author: D.D. Sinha, J.

Citation: MANU/MH/1624/2003.

Print Page

LLM Notes: Prisoner Classification in India: Objectives, Methods, and Consequences

 Introduction

Prisoner classification is a foundational aspect of prison management, aimed at categorizing inmates based on specific criteria such as legal status, criminal history, gender, age, and health conditions. In India, this classification is governed primarily by the Prisons Act of 1894, supplemented by guidelines from the Model Prison Manual of 2016, judicial pronouncements, and recommendations from various expert committees. Effective prisoner classification is crucial for maintaining security, ensuring humane treatment, and facilitating rehabilitation within correctional institutions.

Categories of Prisoners in Indian Prisons

Indian prisons broadly classify prisoners into several distinct categories:

1. Convicted Prisoners

Print Page

Classification of Prisoners and Their Rights in India

The classification of prisoners is a crucial aspect of the Indian penal system, aimed at ensuring that individuals are housed in a manner that reflects their legal status, behavior, and rehabilitation needs. This article explores the different categories of prisoners in India and outlines their rights as per Indian law.

 Classification of Prisoners

Prisoners in India are primarily classified into following main categories:

1. Convicted Prisoners: These individuals have been found guilty by a court and are serving their sentences. They can be further divided into:

Print Page

Supreme Court directs all courts to append a coversheet to judgment informing the convict about availability of free legal aid facilities for pursuing higher remedies while furnishing copy of judgment of conviction/dismissal/reversal of acquittal/dismissal of bail applications

xvi. We direct the Registry to forward a copy of this judgment to all the High Courts in the country. The High Courts may consider the feasibility of issuing a practice direction to the effect that all courts including the High Court while furnishing the copy of the judgment of conviction/dismissal/reversal of acquittal/dismissal of bail applications, may append a coversheet to the judgment informing the convict about the availability of free legal aid facilities for pursuing higher remedies. The coversheet may set out the contact address and phone number of the legal aid committee attached to the court for seeking appropriate guidance. Similar information may be made available in the notices issued to the Respondents by the concerned courts in appeals against acquittal. The High Courts may on their webpage carry information about the legal aid facilities available in the State.

REPORTABLE

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Writ Petition No. 1082 of 2020

Decided On: 23.10.2024

Suhas Chakma Vs. Union of India (UOI) and Ors.

Hon'ble Judges/Coram:

B.R. Gavai and K.V. Viswanathan, JJ.

Author: K.V. Viswanathan, J.

Citation: MANU/SC/1147/2024,2024 INSC 813.

Print Page

Understanding Institutional Correction of prisoners in India

 Institutional correction in India refers to the rehabilitation and management of offenders within correctional facilities, such as prisons and reform homes. The primary aim is not only to punish but also to reform individuals, helping them reintegrate into society as law-abiding citizens. This article explores the various aspects of institutional correction, including the legal framework, types of institutions, rehabilitation programs, and the philosophy guiding corrections.

 Legal Framework

The institutional correction system in India is governed by several laws and guidelines:

- The Prisons Act, 1894: This act provides the legal framework for managing prisons in India, outlining the rights and duties of prisoners and prison authorities.

- The Model Prison Manual: Issued by the Ministry of Home Affairs, this manual sets standards for prison administration, focusing on humane treatment, rehabilitation, and prisoners' rights.

- The Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015: This act addresses the correctional needs of juvenile offenders, emphasizing rehabilitation over punishment.

Print Page

Bombay HC: Procedure to be followed by Court if accused is suffering from mental illness.

 In terms of sub-section (2) of Section 330 of the

Code of Criminal Procedure, if the case is one in which, in the

opinion of the Magistrate or Court, as the case may be, the

bail cannot be granted, it shall order the said accused to be

kept in such a place where regular psychiatric treatment can

be provided and shall report the action taken to the State

Government.{Para 12}

13. In terms of sub-section (1) of Section 103 of the

Mental Healthcare Act, 2017, if any order is passed under

Section 330 of the Code of Criminal Procedure directing

admission of the prisoner with mental illness into any

suitable mental health establishment, shall be suffcient

authority for the admission of such person in such

establishment to which such person may be lawfully

transferred for care and treatment therein. The learned A.P.P.

has suggested that the applicant may be referred to the

Regional Mental Hospital, Yerwada, Pune for admission, care

and further treatment.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD

901 BAIL APPLICATION NO.1426 OF 2020

Shankar Sopan Shikare Vs  The State of Maharashtra

CORAM : V.K. JADHAV, J.

DATE : 10.12.2020

Print Page

Whether jail authorities can detain prisoner in jail if the court has directed them to produce him before the court?

 Section 269 (c) of the Cr.P.C. prescribes that where a person in respect of whom an order is made under Section 267, requiring attendance of a prisoner before a particular court, is in custody for a period that would expire before expiration of the time required for complying with the order and for taking him back to the prison in which he is confined or detained, in those circumstances, the officer in charge of the prison must abstain from carrying out the Court's order and instead, should send a statement of reasons to the concerned court for the said absence. [See order dated 15/05/2020 passed in W.P. (Crl.) 802/2020: Vinod Bansal Vs. State & Anr.,]

9. Also the Allahabad High Court in Dharampal and another Vs. State of U.P. and another, MANU/UP/0349/1981 has held as under:-

"9. A consideration of the aforementioned provisions indicate that the requisition under S. 3(2), Prisoners (Attendance in Courts) Act, 1955, and S. 267(1), Cr.P.C. can be addressed to Supdt., of a District jail who is already holding a prisoner under an authority of law. The requisition by itself does not authorise the detention of any person. It merely requires the officer in charge of the prison (1) to produce the detenu before the requisitioning Court on the date fixed by it and (2) after the purpose of requisition is over, to take him back and to keep him in custody in accordance with the writ or direction issued by the Court which had authorised his detention in jail. As laid down in S. 55, Prisons Act, 1894, during the period the prisoner is away from the prison in pursuance of the requisition, he would throughout be deemed to be in the custody of the prison and would be subject to all the same incidents as if he were actually in prison.

10. The requisitions issued by the criminal Courts in Haryana, therefore, did not authorise the Supdt., District Jail, Meerut, to keep the two petitioners in his custody. They merely required the Supdt., to produce the two petitioners before the concerned courts only if the Supdt., was entitled to keep them in his custody under some valid authority. Since the various requisition orders did not authorise the Supdt., District Jail, Meerut to keep the two petitioners in custody and the moment the petitioners had been admitted to bail in all the criminal cases in connection with which their detention in District Jail, Meerut had been authorised, the authority of the Supdt., District Jail, to keep the petitioners under detention came to an end and the petitioners' detention after being released on bail, became illegal and without authority of law. The requisitions received from the criminal Courts at Haryana under S. 3, Prisoners (Attendance in Courts) Act, 1955 or under S. 267 Cr.P.C. could not confer any valid authority on the Supdt., of jail to kept the petitioners under detention and render his custody in District Jail, Meerut valid."

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI

W.P. (Crl.) 822/2020

Decided On: 19.05.2020

 Anil Mittal  Vs. State (NCT of Delhi) and Ors.

Hon'ble Judges/Coram:

Manmohan and Sanjeev Narula, JJ.

W.P.(CRL.) 822/2020

Print Page

What is object of judicial appraisal by Judge while grant remission to prisoner?

 As observed earlier, in the case of State of Haryana Vs.
Mohinder Singh & Ors (supra), the decision to grant remission has to be
reasonable and fair to all the concerned and that the grant of remission is
statutory. The object of providing for judicial appraisal is to ensure that the
Order or the Policy or the Rules of the State Government for grant of
remissions are applied and implemented reasonably and fairly. When a
Judicial Officer makes a judicial appraisal of the entitlement of the prisoner
for grant of the State remission under the said Government Circular, the
scope of judicial appraisal is to examine whether the case of the prisoner is
covered by the Order contained in the said Government
Resolution/Circular.
11] In the present case, we find that the learned Additional Sessions
Judge has not even adverted to the said Government Circular with a view
to ascertain whether the petitioner is entitled to the benefit of remission.
He has merely observed that considering the nature of the offence
committed by the petitioner, he should be denied remission.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.1414 OF 2018

Satish Dada Londhe Vs The State of Maharashtra 


CORAM : A.S. OKA & A.S.GADKARI, J.J.
DATE : 1st February 2019.
(Per A.S. Oka, J.)

Print Page

UK Supreme court Judgment on vicarious liability of prison authorities for torts of prisoners

The fact that the prison service, and the operators of contracted-out prisons,
are under a statutory duty to provide prisoners with useful work, is not incompatible
with the imposition of vicarious liability. The legislation does not itself exclude the
imposition of vicarious liability. Nor is it argued that any distinct point arises under
section 2(1)(a) of the Crown Proceedings Act 1947, in terms of which the Crown is
subject to all those liabilities in tort to which, if it were a private person of full age
and capacity, it would be subject in respect of torts committed by its servants or
agents. Authorities concerned with compulsory pilotage are not in point: the prison
service is not required to provide particular types of employment, or to allocate 
particular prisoners to particular activities. In practice, prisoners can be allocated to
a variety of workplaces both inside and outside prisons, having regard to the relevant
risks. More particularly, the prison service is not compelled to employ prisoners in
the kitchen, and has a meaningful power of selection in respect of the prisoners it
chooses to employ there. It appears from the evidence that the prison service takes
particular care when selecting prisoners who are suitable to work in the kitchen,
having regard to the risks involved in that setting. A restricted pool from which to
select a workforce was a feature of the Christian Brothers case, and is not
uncommon even in ordinary cases of employment: an employer can only select from
those who apply for appointment, and may often have a small pool from which to
choose.
Hilary Term
[2016] UKSC 10
On appeal from: [2014] EWCA Civ 132
JUDGMENT
Cox (Respondent) v Ministry of Justice (Appellant)
before
Lord Neuberger, President
Lady Hale, Deputy President
Lord Dyson
Lord Reed
Lord Toulson
JUDGMENT GIVEN ON
2 March 2016

LORD REED: (with whom Lord Neuberger, Lady Hale, Lord Dyson and
Lord Toulson agree)

Print Page

Whether prisoner have right to procreate in jail?

 For the reasons assigned above, I sum up my conclusions and answer the questions as formulated in Para 9 of this order, in the following terms.-

i. Question - (i) Whether the right to procreation survives incarceration, and if so, whether such a right is traceable within our Constitutional framework?

Yes, the right to procreation survives incarceration. Such a right is traceable and squarely falls within the ambit of Article 21 of our Constitution read with the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

ii. Whether penological interest of the State permits or ought to permit creation of facilities for the exercise of right to procreation during incarceration?

The penological interest of the State ought to permit the creation of facilities for the exercise of right to procreation during incarceration, may be in a phased manner, as there is no inherent conflict between the right to procreate and incarceration, however, the same is subject to reasonable restrictions, social order and security concerns;

iii. Whether 'right to life' and 'personal liberty' guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution include the right of convicts or jail inmates to have conjugal visits or artificial insemination (in alternate)?

'Right to life' and 'personal liberty' guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution include the right of convicts or jail inmates to have conjugal visits or artificial insemination (in alternate). However, the exercise of these rights are to be regulated by procedure established by law, and are the sole prerogative of the State.

iv. If question No. (iii) is answered in the affirmative, whether all categories of convicts are entitled to such right(s)?

Ordinarily, all convicts, unless reasonably classified, are entitled to the right to procreation while incarcerated. Such a right, however, is to be regulated as per the policy established by the State which may deny the same to a class or category of convicts as the aforesaid right is not an absolute right and is subject to the penological interests of the State.

Equivalent Citation: 2015CriLJ2282, 2015(1)RCR(Criminal)509

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

C.W.P. No. 5429 of 2010 (O&M)

Decided On: 29.05.2014

 Jasvir Singh and Ors.
Vs.
 State of Punjab and Ors.

Hon'ble Judges/Coram:Surya Kant, J.

Print Page

Whether Passive smoking in prison is breach of human rights of prisoner?

Smith, R (on the application of v Secretary of State for Justice and G4S UK Ltd  [2014] EWCA Civ 380 – read judgment

This case raises the question of whether it is a breach of a non-smoking prisoner’s Convention right to respect for his private life and to equality of access to such rights (ECHR Articles 8 and 14) to compel him to share a cell with a smoker.

The appellant, a convicted sex offender serving a long sentence, was required between 21st and 28th March 2012 to share a cell with a fellow prisoner who was a smoker. It was known to the prison authorities that the appellant was a non-smoker, and the requirement to share with a smoker was contrary to his wishes. The sharing complained of ended when the appellant was transferred to another prison on 28th March 2012.

Print Page