PENOLOGY & VICTIMOLOGY

PRISON VISIT REPORT AND ROLE OF PRISON

ADMINISTRATION IN THE LIGHT OF
OBJECTIVES OF PUNISHMENT



INTRODUCTION
The existence of Prisons can be traced back to the ancient period. Initially there was a belief
that rigorous isolation and custodial measures would reform the offenders. In due course it is
being substituted by the modern concept of social defense.
A prison is a State subject under List-II of the Seventh Schedule to the Constitution of India.
The management and administration of Prisons falls exclusively in the domain of the State
Governments, and is governed by the Prisons Act, 1894 and the Prison Manuals of the
respective State Governments.
1
Thus, States have the primary role, responsibility and
authority to change the current prison laws, rules and regulations. The Central government
provides assistance to the States to improve security in prisons, repair and renovation of old
prisons, medical facilities, development of borstal schools, facilities to women offenders,
vocational training, modernization of prison industries, training to prison personnel, and for
the creation of high security enclosures.
The main objectives of the prison system can be categorized as follows:
To prevent the occurrence of crime.
To punish the transgressors and the criminals.
To rehabilitate the transgressors and the criminals.
To compensate the victims as far as possible.
To maintain law and order in the society.
To deter the offenders from committing any criminal act in the future.
DRAWBACKS OF BEING EXPOSED TO THE JUDICIAL MACHINERY
The laws in our country are highly unforgiving and unhelpful. Once a person is convicted and
is taken to prison, his life takes a spin like no other. The wheels of justice are set into motion
by the judicial system and the person is crushed under its weight as he is made to endure hell
on earth i.e. the Indian prisons. The Indian judiciary is unable to cope with the exces backlogs
of case. Due to this reason, even a petty first time offender like a pick pocket faces a
minimum of 2 years imprisonment for steling a meagre Rs. 200.

1
http://ncrb.nic.in/PSI-2011/Foreword-2011.pdf, last accessed on 28
th
February 2014 at 9:15 p.m IST
One must understand the gravity of seriousness of being arrested and imprisoned in this
country. The treatment metted out to prisoners is abysmal and does not help reform them in
any manner whatsoever. Often these prisoners revert back to their old ways, building up a
thirst for revenge, nurturing the idea of seeking vengeance once they are released from
prison.
The Indian society is an unforgiving place, with prisoners not finding any guidance once they
are released. Those released are shunned by society, labelled as criminals, and left alone to
bear the brunt of salvaging whatever remains of their lives. They are treated like the filth of
the society, and this often results in causing a relapse and sends these ex-prisoners spiralling
into the same web of crime.
RIGHTS OF PRISONERS
In India, the courts have acknowledged and several judgements recognise a wide array of
fundamental and other rights of prisoners. The following enumerates the broad categories of
rights, which are not exhaustive as this field is still developing and slowly evolving
(Sreekumar R, 2003). These rights have been drawn from various case laws (Madhurima,
2009). Though these rights are articulated in the case laws, they do not reach the poor
prisoners.
1. Right to be lodged appropriately based on Proper Classification.
2. Special Right of young prisoners to be segregated from adult prisoners.
3. Rights of women prisoners.
4. Right to healthy environment.
5. Right to bail.
6. Right to speedy trial.
7. Right to free legal services.
8. Right to basic needs such as food, water and shelter.
9. Right to have interviews with ones Lawyer.
10. Right against being detained for more than the period of sentence imposed by the court.
11. Right to protection against being forced into sexual activities.
12. Right against arbitrary use of handcuffs and fetters.
13. Right against torture, cruel and degrading punishment.
14. Right not to be punished with solitary confinement for a prison offence.
15. Right against arbitrary prison punishment.
16. Right to air grievances and to effective remedy.
17. Right to evoke the writ of habeas corpus against prison authorities for excesses.
18. Right to be compensated for violation of human rights.
19. Right to visits and access by family members of prisoners.
20. Right to write letters to family and friends and to receive letters, magazines, etc.
21. Right to rehabilitation and reformative programmes.
22. Right in the context of employment of prisoners and to prison wages.
23. Right to information about prison rules.
24. Right to emergency and reasonable health care.
Following are the reasons cited in various case laws for which prisoners rights were
recognised and upheld by the Indian judiciary.
a) Convicts are not by mere reason of the conviction denuded of all the fundamental rights
which they otherwise possess- Justice V.R. Krishna Iyer
2

b) All such rights except those that are taken away in the legitimate process of incarceration
still remain with the prisoner. These include rights that are related to the protection of basic
human dignity as well as those for the development of the prisoner into a better human
being.
3


2
Sunil Batra Vs. Delhi Administration AIR. 1978 SC 1575 ; Sunil Batra Vs Delhi Administration (1980)3 SC
488
3
Charles Shobraj Vs. Superintendent, Tihar Jail, AIR 1978, SC 1514
c) If a person commits any crime, it does not mean that by committing a crime, he/she ceases
to be a human being and that he/she can be deprived of those aspects of life which constitutes
human dignity.
d) It is increasingly being recognised that a citizen does not cease to be a citizen just because
he/she has become a prisoner.
e) The convicted persons go to prisons as punishment and not for punishment
4
Prison
sentence has to be carried out as per the courts orders and no additional punishment can be
inflicted by the prison authorities without sanction.
5

f) Prisoners depend on prison authorities for almost all of their day to day needs, and the state
possesses control over their life and liberty, the mechanism of rights springs up to prevent the
authorities from abusing their power. Prison authorities have to be, therefore, accountable for
the manner in which they exercise their custody over persons in their care, especially as
regards their wide discretionary powers.
g) Imprisonment as punishment is now rethought of as rehabilitative punishment. This
involves a philosophy that individuals are incarcerated so that they have an opportunity to
learn alternative behaviours to curb their deviant lifestyles. Correction, therefore, is a system
designed to correct those traits that result in criminal behaviour. The rehabilitative model
argues that the purpose of incarceration is to reform inmates through educational, training,
and counselling programmes. This development and growth requires certain human rights
without which no reformation takes place.
h) Disturbing conditions of the prison and violation of the basic human rights such as
custodial deaths, physical violence/torture, police excess, degrading treatment, custodial rape,
poor quality of food, lack of water supply, poor health system support, not producing the
prisoners to the court, unjustified prolonged incarceration, forced labour and other problems
observed by the apex court have led to judicial activism
6

i) Overcrowded prisons, prolonged detention of under trial prisoners, unsatisfactory living
condition and allegations of indifferent and even inhuman behaviour by prison staff has

4
Jon Vagg 1994. Prison System- A Comparative Study of Accountability in England, France, Germany and the
Netherlands, Clarenden Press, Oxford
5
Supra footnote 5
6
National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) 1993, Available online at http://nhrc.nic.in/ Accessed on 28
th

February 2014 at 9:45 pm IST
repeatedly attracted the attention of critics over the years. Unfortunately, little has changed.
There have been no worthwhile reforms affecting the basic issues of relevance to prison
administration in India.
7

Rights of the prisoners have been expressed under the Indian Constitution as well as Indian
laws governing prisons. The Supreme Court and High Court rulings have played a crucial
role in enumerating the rights of prisoners.
A land mark judgement by Justice V.R. Krishna Iyer enumerated basic human rights of the
prisoners. Mr. Sunil Batra had written a letter from Tihar Jail, Delhi to the Supreme Court
providing information about the torture and inhuman conditions of the prison. This case has
become a landmark case in prison reforms.
8
This case recognized the various rights of
prisoners in the most comprehensive manner. The judgement held that: No prisoner can be
personally subjected to deprivation not necessitated by the fact of incarceration and the
sentence of the court. All other freedoms belong to him to read and write, to exercise and
recreation, to meditation and chant, to comforts like protection from extreme cold and heat, to
freedom from indignities such as compulsory nudity, forced sodomy and other such
unbearable vulgarity, to movement within the prison campus subject to requirements of
discipline and security, to the minimal joys of self-expression, to acquire skills and
techniques. A corollary of this ruling is the Right to Basic Minimum Needs necessary for the
healthy maintenance of the body and development of the human mind. This umbrella of
rights would include: Right to proper Accommodation, Hygienic living conditions,
Wholesome diet, Clothing, Bedding, timely Medical Services, Rehabilitative and Treatment
programmes
Another land mark judgement pronounce by the judiciary is the right to compensation in
cases of illegal deprivation of personal liberty. The Rudal Shah case
9
is an instance of
breakthrough in Human Rights Jurisprudence. The petitioner Rudal Shah was detained
illegally in prison for more than fourteen years. He filed Habeas Corpus before the court for
his immediate release and, interalia, prayed for his rehabilitation cost, medical charges and
compensation for illegal detention. After his release, the question before the court was

7
Justice A N Mulla Committee. The All India Committee on jail Reforms (198083) under the Chairmanship
of Justice A. N. Mulla. Available online at
http://www.humanrightsinitiative.org/publications/prisons/prison_visiting_system.pdf Accessed on 2nd March
2014
8
Supra Footnote 5
9
Rudal Shah Vs. State of Bihar, AIR 1983 SC 1086

"whether in exercise of jurisdiction under Article 32, could the court pass an order for
payment of money? Was such an order in the nature of compensation consequential upon the
deprivation of fundamental right? There is no expressed provision in the Constitution of India
for grant of compensation for violation of a fundamental right to life and personal liberty. But
the judiciary has evolved a right to compensation in cases of illegal deprivation of personal
liberty. The Court granted monetary compensation of Rs.35,000 against the Bihar
Government for keeping the person in illegal detention for 14 years even after his acquittal.
The Court departed from the traditional approach, ignored the technicalities while granting
compensation. The decision of Rudal Shah was important in two respects. Firstly, it held that
violation of a constitutional right can give rise to a civil liability enforceable in a civil court
and; secondly, it formulates the bases for a theory of liability under which a violation of the
right to personal liberty can give rise to a civil liability. The decision focused on extreme
concern to protect and preserve the fundamental right of a citizen. It also calls for
compensatory jurisprudence for illegal detention in prison.
REPORT ON PRISON VISIT
On 13
th
February 2014, the students of Symbiosis Law School (Pune) visited the Yerawada
Central Jail under the guidance of their professors, Prof. Kulkarni and Prof. Aghav. One of
the largest prisons in South Asia, Yerawada Central Jail is spread over 512 acres of land and
houses 3,600 prisoners. An officer of the prison was kind enough to dedicate time to the
students and show them around the jail campus. A visit to the prison kitchen was also
arranged where the students got a chance to taste the prison food. The officer also gave the
students a tour of the cells where Mahatma Gandhi, Motilal Nehru, Jawaharlal Nehru and
Sardar Patel were imprisoned during their struggle for freedom.
The officer continued to explain that prisoners at Yerawada were classified by the presence of
coloured bands on their uniforms. A red band indicated that the prisoner was a dangerous
criminal and had attemped to escape. A yellow band indicated that the prisoner had been
sentenced to a term of at least 5 years, and the absence of any coloured band indicated that
the prisoner was in for a sentence of less than 5 years. The prisoners were given freedom to
walk around the campus during the day. They are kept in their cells from 6 pm to 6 am
everyday i.e. after sunset till sunrise. The officer informed us that the prisoners were given
skilled and unskilled work to perform during their time inside. They were paid wages for the
same, and could collect money from the prison office in case they wished to purchase
something from the prison canteen or send money home to their famililes. Prisoners were
encouraged to do carpentary, farming, cattle rearing and other labour. This was an effort in
order to rehabilitate and reform the prisoners into responsible members of the society.
RETRIBUTIVE THEORY & REFORMATIVE THEORY
Retributive punishment, in the only sense in which it is admissible in any rational system of
administering justice, is that which serves of the satisfaction of that emotion of retributive
indignation, which in all the healthy communities is stirred up by injustice.
Retribution was formerly based on the theory of revengean eye for an eye and tooth for
tooth. Today, on the other hand, the retributive theory is based on the idea that punishment
is the necessary alkali to neutralise the evil effects of the crime.
Crime is the first half but the punishment the second half. The idea behind the retributive
punishment is that of the restoration of the moral order, the appeasement of the disturbed
conscience of society itself, and the maintenance of the concerning power of the State which
becomes aggrieved when a crime is committed and inflicts punishment to set matters right.
Historically, at first the instinct or the impulse of revenge was gratified by retaliatory
measures on the part of the individual who suffered by the crime committed, or in the case of
murder, by his relatives. There are many ways for achieving social solidarity. What is needed
is the measures designed to prevent crime. The idea of retribution is to be totally rejected.
Further arguments against retribution are:
1. Protecting the interests of criminals is as important today as protecting the interests of
society or the victims. The punishment should therefore be proportional to the loss
incurred.
2. The present society stresses humanitarianism and scientific progress. The movement
in such a society should be to prevent crime rather than make criminal suffer, which is
largely repressive.
3. Since almost all prisoners return to society, it is necessary that they must not be so
stigmatised that they cannot take up lawful pursuits upon their release. Retributive
punishment only makes criminals confirmed enemy of society.
4. Religious conscience and moral and ethical principles have always emphasised the
importance of forgiveness, pity, mercy, charity, and considered these values as
supreme values. It is, therefore, only moral and proper to pardon the criminal.
5. Holding that if society fails to punish the offender, the victim and his relatives may
take the law in their own hands is not correct. Today, the victims of crime tend to
shrink from the idea of subjecting criminals to physical torture. In fact, the victim
feels satisfied if his loss is restored or he is properly compensated. He disregards the
causes that produce a criminal or the measures adopted for dealing with criminals.
6. Resorting to the argument that a person can be prevented from indulging in crime by
awarding him retributive punishment is invalid. Mackenzie has stated that it is only
when an offender sees the punishment of his crime to be the natural or logical
outcome of his act that he is likely to be led to any real repentance and it is only this
recognition that is likely to lead others to genuine abhorrence of crime.
In spite of these arguments, it may be pointed out that though reformation and in some cases
deterrence receive more attention, yet retribution too continues to remain one of the purposes
of punishment.
There are cases where retributive punishment is still considered necessary. The retributive
punishment of imposing death penalty on offenders like Ranga and Billa in Delhi who had
killed Chopra children was not condemned by society, nor has the retributive punishment to
the terrorists of Punjab and Kashmir who had killed a large number of innocent persons of all
religions Hindus, Sikhs, and Muslims been described as severe and unjustified.
The reform theory is the most popular theory today. It holds that the proper aim of criminal
procedure is to reform the criminal so that he may become adjusted to the social order. This
theory is in fact a mixture of sentimental and utilitarian motives.
With the fading of faith in inflicting pain and with the spread of humane thought, belief in re-
educating the criminal to enable him to become a useful member of society developed.
Even from the strictest economic point of view, individual men and women are considered to
be the most valuable assets of any society. It is therefore better to save them for a life of
usefulness rather than punish them by imprisonment.
Punishment has its limitations:
1. It may produce harmful effects in the criminals who are punished. There remains the
possibility of serious damage to the personality of the offender. With bitterness in his
heart, he may seek an opportunity to strike back at society.
2. It may label the offender not only a criminal in his own eyes but also in the eyes of
the community. Thus stigmatized, a man may be psychologically isolated from law-
abiding groups and again be driven into the association of criminals upon his release
from prison.
3. Punishment may also cause a person to develop caution and unusual skills, so that he
could protect himself from apprehension, conviction and imprisonment.
It is, therefore, necessary that punishment be replaced by some alternative so that an offender
might preserve his self-respect and renew loyalties for group standards. Criminologists have,
as a result, started talking of reformation and rehabilitation of offenders.
Reformation must involve change of environment, which makes a person criminal reducing
his personality adjustments, and create barriers in the inculcation of the principles of good
citizenship.
The propounders of reformative theory like Bentham (Rationale of Punishment, 1830: 21),
Ewing (The Morality of Punishment, 1929: 5), and Hart (Punishment and Responsibility,
1968:10) rejected the retributive and deterrent theories of punishment in the nineteenth and
twentieth century have and sought to take the anger out of punishment.
According to Bentham, "punishment is not an act of wrath or vengeance but is an act of
calculation, disciplined by considerations of the social good and the offenders' needs. The
reformative and utilitarian justification of punishment was that it would persuade the offender
to accept his sufferings and face his own guilt.
SOLUTIONS
The consequence of the Indian human rights movement's failure to establish itself
institutionally as a more effective force is not the absence of civil liberties in India. Political
freedom is well-entrenched in India, despite the severe blow it was dealt at the time Prime
Minister Indira Gandhi imposed emergency rule in the 1970s, and despite even the
restrictions and abuses that have accompanied Indian government combat with separatist
movements in Punjab, Kashmir and Assam. Indeed, in some respects, the fact that political
freedom in India can survive such great setbacks is a testament to its strength. Yet so far as
day to day life is concerned, civil liberties are available only to the "haves" in India, the
middle class and the well to do. If lower class Indians are caught up in the machinery of the
law, they will probably suffer a sorry fate. Though India's human rights groups are devoted to
the protection of such persons, and do excellent work in their behalf, they have not succeeded
in making civil liberties a reality for India's "have-nots."
The difficulty in dealing with abuses in police detention and in the prisons is exacerbated by
the decentralization of authority in India. A determination to correct these abuses at the
central government level would not suffice. The governments of the various states would
have to decide to end torture by the police and to end the mistreatment of lower class Indians
who make up the bulk of the prison population, and enforce those decisions.
Though various rights have been granted to prisoners, in reality, they do not reach the
prisoners. An outstanding example is the right to speedy trial. A huge backlog of cases
impedes the delivery of justice and this is a violation of the rights by the court itself.
Similarly, free legal aid is an idealistic goal, but presently far from reality. Many of the
prisoners do not know about the services and they are unable to utilise it. Thus it would be
imperative to carry out systematic legal aid awareness courses and effective implementation
of the already existing schemes of legal aid.
PRISON REFORMS IN TIHAR JAIL
As part of jail reforms, Vipassana camps are organized inside the prison walls of Tihar Jail,
New Delhi. Being a central jail, Tihar Jail is a host to inmates arrested for crimes ranging
from petty theft and robbery to heinous crimes likes rape, murder and the like. Vipassana is a
meditative technique that helps establish peace of mind. It is a method of self-observation/
introspection that calms the conscious. The method emphasizes on leading a balanced life
through achieving patience, purity of mind and peace. Vipassana is a technique of cleansing
the mind disturbed by enmity and attachment. It is an active method of making life tension
free.
The technique has been adopted in several prisons across India. In the history of Indian
police, the first ever Vipassana camp was held in Central Jail, Jaipur in the year 1975. About
120 prison inmates participated in the camp. The camp was followed by camps in Rajasthan
Police Academy, Jaipur (1976); Central Jail, Jaipur (1977); Sabaramati Central Jail,
Ahmedabad (1991) and Central Jail, Baroda (1992). The camps showed positive and
meaningful results.
In 1993, Kiran Bedi, a reformist Inspector General of India's prison learned of the success of
using VipassanA in a jail in Jaipur, Rajasthan and decided to make another attempt in India's
largest prison, Tihar Jail, New Delhi. This program was said to have dramatically changed
the behaviour of inmates and jailers alike. It was actually found that inmates who completed
the 10 day course were less violent and had a lower recidivism rate than other inmates. It was
introduced in Tihar by Ms. Kiran Bedi as part of humanistic jail reforms at the behest of
Rajinder Singh, a jail official and Vipassana practitioner. The first Vipassana camp in Central
Jail, Delhi was held on 22 November 1993 in Jail 2. In April 1994, Shri S.D. Goenka
organized a Vipassana Camp in which over 1100 jail officials, prison staff and inmates
participated. In April, 1994 itself, Shri Goenka himself formally inaugurated a permanent
Vipassana Center, Dhamma in Jail No. 4 at Tihar Jail. Since then it has been continually in
practice as a Sadhna Kendra.
CONCLUSION
Although several judgements have recognised the rights of prisoners, these have resulted in
few amendments to legislation. While judicial sensitivity and activism is appreciable, it must
be borne in mind that the countrys criminal justice system still suffers from substantive and
procedural deficiencies; once a citizen is arrested, even if on a relatively minor charge, he/she
could be held in custody for years before his/her case comes up for trial. Those who are
affluent are still being able to negotiate their way around the numerous obstacles that lie on
the road to justice. For an ordinary citizen, an encounter with the law is very much the stuff
of nightmares. There is a long course before the Indian judiciary to be followed in order to
achieve the goal of social justice.