No Caste Discrimination Or Caste Based Segregation In Prisons And Jails In India: Supreme Court Judgment

Key Points:

• The Supreme Court of India declared caste segregation in Indian prisons UNCONSTITUTIONAL.
• The court stated that the dignity of all should be maintained even if they are in prison regardless of their caste or religion.
• Discrimination in any form is considered as violative of Articles 14, 15, 17, and 21 of the Indian Constitution.

Introduction

In the latest judgment delivered on 3rd October 2024, the Supreme Court of India directed the matter in question of the segregation based on the caste system occurring in the prisons of India, directly violating Fundamental rights, as mentioned in the Indian Constitution. The case, Sukanya Shantha vs. Union of India, deliberately focused on the injustice faced by prisoners, specifically those who belonged to marginalized communities, and set an example for reforming the practices of prisons all over the country.

Background of the Case

The issue was first addressed by a journalist, Sukanya Shantha, in her article “From Segregation to Labour, Manu's Caste Law Governs the Indian Prison System,” published on December 10, 2020. Her work focused on violations of constitutional rights occurring in the prisons, where various state prisons sanctioned discriminatory practices disobeying Articles 14, 15, 17, 21, and 23 of the Indian Constitution.
The case also briefed about the history of discrimination in the Indian penal system, which can be seen in Colonial laws such as the Criminal Tribes Act, which was subsequently a dishonor for the people who belong to the marginalized communities. Even after the repeal of these types of laws, the continuation of casteism is somehow still there in society and this factor managed to manifest the segregation in the Indian prisons causing havoc for prisoners, mainly for those who belonged to the denotified tribes or communities.  

Key Issues Addressed by the Court

The judgment focused on several critical issues, including the invisibility of prisoners and the injustices they were facing in the prisons. The Court highlighted the need for fair procedures and the protection of prisoners' rights under Article 21, which gives a guarantee for the protection of the right to life and personal liberty 97.
One of the key issues concerned by the Court was the removal of the "caste" column and any references telling about caste in the registers of undertrial and convict prisoners. This concept aims to throw out all the concepts associated with caste in the timeline of the prisons to make sure that every individual who is a prisoner for the time, shall be treated with equality and any of his rights, whether it is about life, personal liberty, or caste discrimination, shall not be infringed in any manner.  

Court's Findings

The Court, after several proceedings, found that there was systemic discrimination against prisoners, particularly those from marginalized communities, was prevailing in the prisons and this was institutionalized in the prison manuals. The judgment declared that these types of provisions in various state prison manuals, which supported caste segregation in any manner, were unconstitutional as these provisions were violative of the fundamental rights, guaranteed by the Indian Constitution. 
The Court directed all the states and Union Territories to review and revise their prison manuals within three months to align with the principles of equality and non-discrimination, as mentioned in the provisions of the Indian Constitution. This revision of the prison manuals shall also address the sections related to "habitual offenders" for prevention of the misuse against the prisoners who belong to the marginalized communities.

Implications of the Judgment

The intimations of this judgment are intellectual. By directing the state governments regarding the amendments in their prison manuals, the Supreme Court of India has taken a very big and significant step towards knocking down institutional discrimination within the prisons as well as the penal system of India. The given judgment not only tends to address the immediate concerns of caste discrimination but also sets a really big and significant example regarding the treatment of the people who belong to marginalized communities in different fields of life, be it the corporate sector or prison. Everyone in this country has the right to be treated equally and with respect. Violation of fundamental rights is not acceptable in society, or in any sector of the country as fundamental rights are a really important part of the basic structure of the Indian Constitution, which should be respected and followed sincerely. 
Moreover, the judgment also tends to serve as a gentle reminder of the ongoing struggle against several types of discrimination as these types of incidents are still happening in almost all the corners of the country. The judgment also highlights the need for continuous advocacy and alertness to ensure that the principles of justice and equality are upheld in practice, particularly for those who are from lower caste or marginalized communities and are often considered as voiceless in society.

Challenges arising

Notwithstanding the forward-looking perspective of the decisions made in the judgment, the implementation of all the factors may present serious challenges. This challenge can be attributed to the presence of caste-based injustices, which are not only limited to the prisons but to the society of India as a whole. A very large number of prison staff, just like other government operatives, may be discriminatory and, thus, can create an obstruction regarding the achievements of the intended reforms. Resistance to change from the hierarchy, ignorance, and unwillingness to alter existing practices are some of the reasons why the amendment of the prison manual is not done promptly.
Also, the necessity of awareness training for the staff of the prisons on the reforms within the law and the need to put them into practice cannot be over-emphasized. Any information on training needs, within the prison, service for development towards removing the caste discrimination from the prison register. This may be considered pointless also if there exist any informal mechanisms of discrimination.
Prisoners may also encourage accountability through the use of technology. For example, if a digital recording system is introduced that precludes any entry of caste titles, the chances of discrimination during admission and processing could be a bit easier. Periodic human rights commission audits would also assist in ensuring that such prisons are not flouting the new requirements.
In both the short and long term, this ruling can be utilized within the context of the system for other forms of reform. For example, beyond simply abolishing the caste order, it is possible to rethink also about the prison system and its functions. The understanding of punishment has to change from punitive to rehabilitative by constructive measures which include the provision of education and vocational skills to prisoners and promoting their physical and mental health to uphold the dignity and equality promised in the Constitution.

Conclusion

The aftermath of the verdict delivered in the case of Sukanya Shantha v Union of India, we can easily say marks a great leap forward in combating the vicious caste discrimination of prisoners in India. With recognition of the systematic injustice against marginalized communities and urging reforms, the Supreme Court of India has reaffirmed its faith in the principles embodied in the Constitution of India. 

Since India is making progress in almost every field, discrimination and inequality remain a lasting entrepreneurship challenge, thus they must be dealt with positively and the rights and dignity of people including those incarcerated should be upheld following the Indian Constitution. This significant judicial pronouncement provides us with an avenue not only for a more egalitarian prison system but also gives light to the current quest for justice in India.

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)

1. What was the judgment given by the Supreme Court of India regarding caste-based segregation in prisons?
2. What are the forms of casteism in Indian jails?
3. What rights are infringed when there is caste-based discrimination happening according to the Indian Constitution?