Caste Discrimination in Prisons not tolerable: Supreme court.
Supreme Court’s Stance on Caste Discrimination in Prisons
On Thursday, the Supreme Court made it unequivocally clear that caste-based discrimination within prisons across the nation would not be tolerated. The Court registered a suo motu case to address and monitor this critical issue [Sukanya Shantha vs Union of India and ors].
Accountability of States
A bench led by Chief Justice of India (CJI) DY Chandrachud, alongside Justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra, warned that States would be held accountable if any caste-based discrimination is uncovered in their prisons.
Prohibition of Degrading Work Assignments
The Court emphasized that prisoners belonging to marginalized castes cannot be subjected to menial, degrading, or inhumane tasks simply due to their caste status. Consequently, it struck down certain rules within the prison manuals of various States that permitted such practices.
Violation of Article 15
The bench asserted, “Assigning cleaning and sweeping duties to marginalized individuals while reserving cooking tasks for higher castes constitutes a violation of Article 15. Indirect phrases that target so-called lower castes cannot be justified within our constitutional framework. Terms like ‘menial’ are equally discriminatory, even if caste is not directly mentioned.”
Removal of Caste Information
Additionally, the Court ordered the elimination of caste identifiers from prison registries.
Unconstitutionality of Discriminatory Provisions
“Provisions that allow for caste discrimination are deemed unconstitutional. All States are instructed to revise their practices in line with this ruling. References to habitual offenders must align with relevant legislation, and all mentions of habitual offenders in State prison manuals are declared unconstitutional. Caste columns in registries for convicts and undertrials must be removed. This Court has taken suo motu cognizance of discrimination within prisons and directs that this issue be reviewed again in three months, with States required to submit compliance reports,” the Court stated.
Denotified Tribes and Criminal Stereotypes
The Court also clarified that members of denotified tribes should not be classified as habitual criminals. It criticized existing prison manuals that perpetuate such discriminatory views, deeming them fundamentally flawed. The judgment underscored that caste discrimination may manifest in both direct and indirect forms, with stereotypes contributing significantly. The State has a responsibility to prevent such discrimination, the bench noted.
Upholding Prisoner Dignity
The Court stressed the importance of protecting the dignity of prisoners. “Denying dignity to prisoners is an echo of colonial times when they were dehumanized. The Constitution mandates humane treatment for prisoners, who must be regarded with consideration for their mental and physical well-being,” the Court remarked.
Critique of Uttar Pradesh Prison Manual
The Court highlighted problematic provisions in the Uttar Pradesh Prison Manual, which stated that individuals serving simple imprisonment would not be assigned menial tasks unless their caste traditionally performed such work. The bench remarked, “No group is inherently destined to be a scavenger class or to engage in specific types of labor. Classifying individuals by cooking ability is an aspect of untouchability that cannot be sanctioned. The stigma that denotified tribe members are criminals from birth perpetuates class-based prejudice.”
Reimagining Article 21
The Court also criticized prison manual regulations that dictated that sweepers should come from specific castes, calling such practices “entirely contrary to substantive equality.” It further stated, “Such practices result in an unfair division of labor within prisons. Labor assignments based on caste or similar criteria cannot be accepted. Article 23 addresses this issue directly.”
Prohibition of Hazardous Work
The Court concluded that no prisoner should be compelled to perform hazardous tasks, such as cleaning sewer tanks.
Background of the Case
This judgment arose from a petition filed by journalist Sukanya Shantha, who has reported extensively on caste-based discrimination within prison systems. The petition highlighted how prison manuals in several States encourage caste discrimination, particularly concerning manual labor assignments impacting denotified tribes and individuals labeled as habitual offenders.
Court’s Previous Actions
Earlier in January, the Supreme Court had issued notices to the Union Government and eleven States regarding this serious issue and called upon Solicitor General (SG) Tushar Mehta to assist in the proceedings.
Disclaimer: (Only the headline and picture of this report may have been reworked by the KanoonKiBaat staff; the rest of the content is auto-generated from a syndicated feed.)
Source Link
