Prisoners manual

The British Government, driven by the desire to administer prisons profitably and economically, had constructed prisons as dreadful places. They accomplished this by enacting the Prison Act of This act was then used by States to enact their own manuals since the Seventh Schedule of the Indian Constitution empowers them to frame laws regarding prisons and other such institutions.

In this article, we argue that the above-mentioned provisions are unconstitutional and violative of fundamental rights. We will begin by briefly discussing some of these discriminatory provisions. The article then will proceed to analyse the constitutional validity of these provisions.

We will then address the Model Prison Manuals which serve as a guide for framing State prison manuals and identify their shortfalls when it comes to tackling the issue of discriminatory provisions. The caste system is a rigid and hierarchical system wherein work is considered as the identity of communities. Due to this system, communities which were employed in degrading jobs were exploited and were not allowed to progress.

This system was officially denounced in when the Indian Constitution came into force. Despite this, casteism is mandated by various state jail manuals. Every subsidiary jail is supposed to be supplied with sweeper servants or similar workers by the jail to which it is affiliated. When it comes to the allotment of cooking, the Haryana manual S. But the Rule is not available in the public domain for further inspection. On a side note, conservancy workers in prison do not have any legal protection since The Prohibition of Employment as Manual Scavengers and their Rehabilitation Act, does not hold prison authorities responsible to get rid of this practice.

Rajasthan Prison Rules, had similar discriminatory provisions. The court observed that the lowest strata of the society are assigned humiliating labour irrespective of the nature of the offence. Subsequently, the Rajasthan Government issued a notification that amends the casteist provisions with an intent to eliminate casteist allotment of labour.

Although this is a welcome step by the Government, a simple amendment will not suffice. This is because the Act states that refusing to obey duties directed by prison authorities will attract punishment Part 2.

Even after complaining, they can be punished if the authorities feel that it is baseless in nature Part 2. Hence, Rajasthan Prison Act still provides unbridled discretion to prison authorities which can be misused unless the whole system is revamped.

While regressive, explicitly casteist provisions continue to exist in some prison manuals, there are also provisions that discriminate based on social status. A case in point is the Haryana jail manual, which classifies prisoners in A, B and C categories It is common practice to segregate prisoners based on the threat they pose to other inmates. Class A includes prisoners who are non-habitual prisoners of good character who commit less serious offences.

Similar provisions are included in the Tamil Nadu S. These manuals also detail the procedure by which courts recommend the classification of prisoners Haryana Jail Manual, S. Courts recommend assigning prisoners to classes based on social and financial status, profession, income and educational qualifications of the prisoner.

The use of these parameters has resulted in different classes of prisoners receiving varying prison privileges. Reports as far back as detail a higher daily stipend for feeding class A and B prisoners, as compared to class C. Class A and B prisoners also had access to more nutritious food, more frequent opportunities to send letters, and receive newspapers. In certain places, class A prisoners were exempted from performing menial tasks and from physical restraints such as handcuffs. Since then, there has been a dearth of research on the matter.

Considering the law allows for such categorisation it is reasonable to assume that such practices continue. They are restricted from moving freely and practicing their professions, but prisoners are entitled to other freedoms along with the protection of Article 21 just like any other citizen.

Also, Article 21 is not limited to mere animal existence but strives to maintain quality and dignity of life of a person. The Prisons Act punishes prisoners for wilfully disabling labour or refusing to work and hence takes away their right to reject such labour.

Adding to this their economic background makes it extremely difficult for them to address their grievances before the court. Equality before the law refers to the fact that no person may obtain any special privileges based on their status and is bound by the law of the land.

Equal protection of the law posits that the same laws apply to people who are placed in equal situations. Our country consists of people of different strata of society, where some are privileged and some marginalised. Additionally, it has been held that uncontrolled discretion provided to authorities violates equal protection of the laws.

To ensure judicious use of discretion, there must be certain norms that the administrator is compelled to follow. Otherwise, arbitrary power to authorities can easily be used to unreasonably discriminate. A case in point, when we consider the Rajasthan Prison Manual, prison administrators have practically unrestricted authority, while prisoners have limited or no means of legal recourse.

These provisions confer sweeping power to prison authorities, without sufficient checks and balances, and are thus categorically arbitrary and unequal. Since Article 14 is a guarantee against arbitrary action as equality and arbitrariness are antithetical. Legislation that burdens or gives privilege to a particular section of society arbitrarily or unjustly then such legislation is called class legislation which violates Article Moreover, these states discriminate against citizens based on their caste and thus violate Article 15 as well.

This legally compels the aggrieved prisoners to undertake humiliating jobs as prescribed. Over the past decade, prison law and conditions have changed significantly.

This new edition is updated to include the most relevant prisoners' rights topics and approaches to litigation. Updates include all aspects of prison life as well as material on legal research, legal writing, types of legal remedies, and how to effectively use those remedies.

Certainly the most authoritative, well-organized and relevant prisoner's rights manual available - - the eagerly awaited fourth edition should be purchased by everyone interested in civil rights for the incarcerated.

Manville has successfully formulated and argued in his own prisoner's civil rights litigation. The Prisoner's Self-Help Litigation Manual, 4th Edition, outlines the rights as well as legal remedies for abuses of those rights.

Boston received his undergraduate degree from Vanderbilt University and earned his J. He has also contributed research and writing concerning prison population issues for the Correctional Association of New York and began his tenure as the Legal Aid Society as a staff attorney.

Boston is widely published, with numerous articles on prisoners, their rights and circumstances nationwide, and has litigated several cases pertaining to prisoner's rights. He also participated in a national working group with the ACLU in response to the Prison Litigation Reform Act, reviewing briefs and pleadings, consulting with prisoner advocates, preparing CLE and practice materials.

He is on the faculty of the Practicing Law Institute and co-administrator of the Prisoners' Rights section of the website www.