PRISON REFORM

Table of contents

Sr. no.	Title
1	Title
2	Index / Table of contents
3	Introduction
4	Prison Reform in India
5	Theories of Punishment
6	Rights of prisons
7	Conclusion
8	References

INTRODUCTION

 Behind the High walls and Iron walls, an unfortunate human world slumbers here have lost even their names and nowadays they are just a roll of numbers. This imprisonment is the final stage of the Criminal Justice Process.

It simply refers to limiting a person’s freedom as a kind of retribution for a crime they have committed. However, when we discuss the people incarcerated, we are not just referring to those whose cases have been determined and resulted in a conviction; we are also referring to those whose cases are still pending before the court of law. The phrase “undertrials” refers to such individuals. Convicts and undertrials alone are not housed within the jail premises for here a curious scene may present itself housing innocents like children within these gated walls in case either or both the parents are inmates and there is no one to take care of them. Ordinarily, children aged below four to six are accommodated in prison with their parents. After discussing a few examples of people we may encounter as prison inmates; our relevant discussion is over some general principles of treatment to prison inmates that apply universally. These are the minimum principles accepted all over the world and include the rights of prisoners as human beings in their peculiar circumstances and terms of confinement. Based on their existence or absence, we discuss the need for and advancements made by India in reforming prisons, turning them from places where the condemned are housed to “training for a new beginning.” Therefore, we must first comprehend the standards for treating prisoners with dignity as co-human beings that are highlighted by international law.

PRISON REFORM IN INDIA

Prisons are a State subject under List II of the Seventh Schedule in the Constitution. The management and administration of Prisons fall exclusively in the domain of State Governments, which are governed by the Prisons Act, of 1894 and the Prison Manuals of the respective State Governments. Hence, the States play a primary role, and responsibility and also hold the power to change the existing prison laws, rules, and regulations.

Even though the number of persons in prison is very few compared with that of many other countries around the world, serious problems indeed exist in many of the prisons across India. Overcrowding, extended detention of under-trials, unsatisfactory living conditions, shortage and poor training for the staff, corruption, and extortion, of adequate social reintegration programs, poor spending on healthcare and welfare, lack of legal aid and allegations of indifferent and even inhuman approach of prison staff among others. On certain occasions, like the blinding of prisoners in Bhagalpur, the grotesque human rights situation also drew great attention. This focus on custodial violence, an inadvertent invitation to authoritarian behavior against vulnerable inmates, is incidentally what the murder of a woman life convict in the Byculla women’s prison in Mumbai in June 2017 has brought back.

A Prison Discipline Committee was formed, which gave a report in 1838. The committee suggested greater severity of treatment while turning down all humanitarian necessities and prisoner reformation. Following the Committee’s recommendations, Central Prisons’ construction got underway in 1846. Thus, modern prison management in India is a holdover from British colonial control. It is based on the idea that a community cannot benefit much from the best criminal legislation unless there is an effective means of administering punishment. The 1838 Committee’s suggestions were echoed by the Second Commission of Inquiry into Jail Management and Discipline in 1864. However, this Commission has made some specific suggestions regarding accommodation for prisoners, and improvement in diet, clothing, bedding, and medical care.

Theories of Punishments

Deterrence

Can fear deter crime? So much debate surrounds whether deterrence works or not. For proponents, punishment deters if it is administered with swiftness, certainty, and severity. A distinction must be drawn between general versus specific deterrence. General deterrence involves holding the individual sentenced for a crime as an example to induce the public to abstain from criminal conduct. Specific deterrence serves to punish an offender in an effort to prevent that offender from committing crimes in the future. Critics observe high recidivism rates of persons sent to prison as proof that specific deterrence is ineffective. Critics further point out that there are limitations to the general deterrence effect of punishment. In the first instance, some crimes, for example, crimes of passion and drug-induced criminality, cannot be deterred because their perpetrators do not make rational use of comparing benefits versus cost (which include punishment) before committing a crime. Lastly, research evidence indicates that the deterrent effect of punishment is weak.

Incapacitation

There is one very popular reason for punishment, which is that it gets criminals off the streets and therefore protects the public. This idea is very typically designed to remove an offender from society so that it would be impossible for him or her to physically commit further crimes against the public while serving a sentence. Incapacitation works if the offenders remain locked up. There is little doubt that incapacitation will lower crime rates by some unspecified amount. The issue is that it’s quite expensive. In addition to the huge costs of constructing and running prisons, incapacitation also has a significant negative impact on families when family members are incarcerated.

Rehabilitation

“Let the punishment fit the criminal” reflects the rehabilitative ethic. Rehabilitation requires that the individual offender be transformed through correctional programs, including drug‐treatment programs, but reviews of correctional treatment reveal that it fails to reliably prevent or decrease crime.

Why has rehabilitation proved ineffective? Research funding has been insufficient, so the potential effectiveness of rehabilitation has not been fully examined. More relevantly still, some criminals are easier to rehabilitate than others. Non‐violent criminals and first‐time offenders have a better chance of being rehabilitated than repeat offenders and violent criminals. Deterrence, incapacitation, and rehabilitation are all consequence arguments looking to the future. They are all forward‐looking theories of punishment. That is, they look to the future in deciding what to do in the present. All three share the ultimate goal of crime prevention. Retribution  “Let the punishment fit the crime” best encapsulates the principle of retribution. Its proponents espouse just deserts, which is justice in terms of equity and proportionality.

Retributivists seek to administer punishments based on an offender’s moral blameworthiness, which would be measured by the seriousness of crimes for which the offender was convicted.

Ideally, the severity of punishments should correspond to the gravity of crimes. Since it is hard to gauge the objective moral depravity of some crimes and/or the severity of some penalties, it is practically impossible to match punishments with crimes. Punishment is an outdated theory. In order to choose how to behave in the present, it looks backward into the past.

RIGHTS OF PRISONERS

According to Article 21 of our constitution, no human, cruel, or degrading treatment will be given to any person (whether it be a citizen or a non-citizen), will be punished. Similarly, the Prisoners Act of 1984, especially dealt with cruelty towards prisoners. If there are some excesses on a prisoner on board, the prison official is liable for it. In recent years, the Indian judiciary—particularly the Supreme Court—has been extremely watchful for violations of prisoners’ human rights.

Right to Legal Aid

Though our country has a complex economic structure and hence crises arise like poverty, destitution, and illiteracy, providing legal machinery itself is expected to deal with that. Legal Aid gives assurance to:

• Equality before law 
• Right to Counsel
• Right to a fair trial

Indian judiciary has played a vital role in developing the concept of legal aid and also widened its scope so as to give fair justice to the prisoners. In the case of M.H. WADANRAO HOSKOT V. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA, the court held that the right to legal aid is one of the ingredients of the procedure.

Right to Speedy Trial – This is one of the basic rights of a prisoner that has been mentioned in Article 21 of the Constitution. It therefore gives assurance of just, fair, and reasonable procedure.

We can see speedy justice for not only those who are citizens and who are outside prison but also for the convicts because of our justice system.

We require rights for prisoners because we see the troubles they face, poor living conditions, and poor hygiene; hence no mind can be reformed-the primary aim is to reform criminal minds.

Right to be informed of the grounds of arrest:

It is a statutory right of an arrested individual to be informed of the reasons for their arrest. As far as the arrested person is concerned, he shall have the right to get informed without any delay about his arrest under both Section 50 and Section 50(A) of the CrPC. Even the arrested individual is covered by Article 22(1) of the Indian Constitution, which states that no one who is arrested should be detained without being given a reason for their arrest. The accused does not, however, have the authority to select or determine which other court will hear the case. According to Section 50(1) of the CrPC, “Any police officer or any other person without warrant detaining a person should immediately notify the individual regarding the particulars of the offence for which the person is arrested or for which ground such arrest has taken place.”

The Subordinate Official, under section 55 of the CrPC, shall inform the person to be arrested of material in writing given by the senior police officer that he is committing or has committed an offence or for any other lawful reason for such arrest. Failure to abide by the above rule makes the arrest unlawful.

Section 75 of Cr.P.C. states: “Where an arrest warrant has been issued, upon arrest the police or other enforcing official shall notify the person to be arrested and, if necessary, shall show him the warrant.” Failure to adhere to the provision makes the arrest illegal.

This privilege has also been conferred by the Indian Constitution. Article 22(2) of the Constitution mandates that “no person arrested shall be detained in custody without being informed of the grounds for such arrest and the right to consult cannot be withheld and may be exercised with the legal practitioner of his choice.” The right to be informed on the part of the arrested is an important right.

Information about the Right to be released on bail:

Whoever is detained without a warrant and who is not accused of a non-bailable offence, the police officer must be informed that he is entitled to release on bail on paying the amount of the security. It helps people who are arrested and are not aware of their rights regarding being released on bail for bailable offenses.

Right to Be Produced Before A Magistrate Without Delay :

Whether the arrest is with or without a warrant, irrespective of the fact of what is realty, the person arresting such person has to produce the arrested person before a legal officer promptly.

Further, the arrested person shall be detained at police headquarters only and nowhere else, before producing him before the Magistrate. All these issues have been awarded in CrPC under Sections 56 and 76 which are as given below: • Section 56 of CrPC says, “The arrested person should be taken to before the magistrate or the higher authority in the police department. If an officer arrests a person without warrant, then he is bound to make arrangements for safe conducting of that person to the magistrate or the highest official in the police department”. Section 76 of Cr. P.C. says, “After executing an arrest warrant against the person arrested, the arrested person should be taken to the court immediately by a police officer or any higher authority”. Further, it has been provided in Section 76 that the arrested person should be produced before the court within 24 hrs if not the police authority or the high official will be blamed. The same has been accounted for in the Constitution as a Fundamental Right under Article 22(2). This privilege has been developed with a view to disposing of the likelihood of police authorities from separating admissions or convincing a man to give data. Right to Speedy Trial:

This is one of the basic rights attributed to a prisoner under Article 21 of the constitution. It facilitates just, fair, and reasonable procedure. It further ensures that a prosecutor may not delay the trial of a criminal suspect arbitrarily which serves the social welfare of the state and gives justice to the victims of the crimes.

Right to be free from solitary confinement, handcuffing, & bar fetters and not to be subjected to torture:

According to Black’s Law Dictionary, “solitary confinement” generally refers to a prisoner’s segregated confinement with only limited access from other individuals, and only at the jail administration’s discretion. In a more severe sense, it refers to a prisoner’s total isolation from human society, with his cell arrangement preventing him from seeing or interacting with other people.

It was held in SUNIL BATRA V. DELHI ADMINISTRATION that solitary confinement could be inflicted only in exceptional cases where a convict was of such a dangerous character that he must be segregated from other prisoners.

Solitary confinement proves utterly degrading and dehumanizing for the prisoners.

The most harmful abnormal environment is when inmates are kept in isolation without any relief. Long-term solitary confinement has terrible effects on the physical and emotional well-being of individuals who endure it. The freedom to see friends and seek legal advice: Inmates receive mental as well as physical protection. People must get together in order to exchange information.

People have the right to legal counsel, and their actions have a direct impact on the case of the convicted.
Friends and family members’ visits provide them with the mental stability they need to endure under such dire circumstances where individuals do not know one another.

Section 50(3) of the Code further clarifies that a person whose proceedings have commenced has a right to be protected by a lawyer of his decision. This starts at the time when the person is detained. The conversation with the lawyer may take place in the presence of police but not within his hearing capacity. Right to be medically examined: Section 54 of Cr. P.C states “The examination of an arrested person by medical practitioner at the request of the arrested person can be allowed- The magistrate must, upon the request of the person who was arrested, conduct a registered medical practitioner’s examination of the person’s body to the extent that the magistrate does not consider this request for vexation, for a postponement, or to defeat the ends of justice: “When an individual who has been arrested, whether on charges or not, claims that the examination of his body provides evidence when he is produced before a magistrate or at any time during his detention in custody, that reflects on any crime committed by the person or that he will commit any crimes committed by anyone against his body.

Right to Silence:

The right to silence is based on the principles of common law.

It signifies that, as a matter of course, courts or tribunals should not infer that the person is guilty because he will not answer the questions put to him by the police or the court.

Under the laws of evidence, any statement or confession by a police officer is not admissible in court.

Confession is one of the major issues in the right of silence. The breaking of the silence of the accused may be done before a magistrate but must be free and voluntary. Right to reasonable wages:  During imprisonment, the prisoners are provided with prison jobs, and they must be paid according to a reasonable rate. The wage rate should not be petty or less than minimum wages.

CONCLUSION

Days have passed into centuries when people used to think that prisons were dungeons where prisoners were lodged to spend the days in dark, dingy cells. The prisons are not institutions meant to fulfill only the retributive and deterrent dimensions of punishment. Prisons are now the places, where inmates are lodged not as forgotten or forsaking members of society but as human beings who have to go out into their surroundings as well behaving as reformed persons. To an inmate, the time spent in prison is punishment, and, therefore, prisons are meant to be places of reformation, not places where additional punishment is served, leading to the violation of one’s human rights.

The importance of affirmed rights of every human being needs no emphasis and, therefore it is the duty of the Court of Justice to protect the fundamental rights of prisoners. Recently, the government of Himachal Pradesh lifted the ban on wearing Gandhi cap in jails.

Jail authorities conduct several seminars to educate the prisoners about legal rights, health and sanitation problems, AIDS and HIV, and also problems related to mental health. An open prison system has come as a very modern and effective alternative to a system of close imprisonment. Such practices are helping to change the traditional and colonial outlook of the Indian prison system and also help the prisoners to become more responsible, creative, and potential citizens. Although a number of actions have been taken to enhance jail conditions, much more work needs to be done. For jail centralization to be successful, the central government, non-governmental organizations, and prison management should all perform the necessary actions.

REFERENCES

Criminology- Ram Ahuja, 2000 1^st edition

Criminology and Penology with Victimology-Prof. N.V. Paranjape, 2017