Holding

Prisoners are persons entitled to dignity and fundamental rights, and the State must undertake comprehensive prison‑reform measures, including under‑trial review committees, legal aid, and implementation of Sections 436/436A of the CrPC.

Summary

The Supreme Court entertained Writ Petition (Civil) No. 406 of 2013 concerning inhuman conditions in 1,382 Indian prisons. Relying on earlier decisions, the Court affirmed that prisoners are persons entitled to fundamental rights, including dignity under Article 21 of the Constitution. It examined the persistent problems of overcrowding, inadequate staff, unnatural deaths, and lack of legal aid, and noted the State's failure to implement Sections 436 and 436A of the CrPC. The Court issued comprehensive directions to set up Under‑Trial Review Committees in every district, to ensure legal aid for indigent under‑trial prisoners, to adopt a revised Model Prison Manual, and to establish a Management Information System for prisons. It also directed the Ministry of Women and Child Development to prepare a juvenile‑care manual and ordered periodic monitoring of the reforms.

Issues considered

Whether prisoners retain fundamental rights, including the right to life and dignity, while in custody under Article 21.
Whether the State is obligated to address overcrowding, staff inadequacy, and inhuman conditions in prisons.
Whether Sections 436 and 436A of the Code of Criminal Procedure must be effectively implemented to secure early release of under‑trial prisoners.
Whether the establishment of Under‑Trial Review Committees in every district is a justiciable directive.
Whether the Ministry of Home Affairs must implement a Management Information System and a revised Model Prison Manual.
Whether a separate manual for juveniles in observation homes under the Juvenile Justice Act is required.
Whether the Court can issue directions for legal aid, compounding of offences, and other prison‑reform measures.

Legislation cited

Subjects

prison reformovercrowdingunder‑trial prisonerslegal aidModel Prison ManualSection 436 CrPCSection 436A CrPCArticle 21human dignitymanagement information systemjuvenile justice

Judgment

[20 I 6] I S.C.R. I 090

A RE-INHUMAN CONDITIONS IN 1382 PRISONS
(Write Petition (C) No. 406 of2013)
FEBRUARY 05, 2016
[MADAN B. LOKUR AND R.K. AGRAWAL, JJ.)
B Prison reforms:
Present case pertaining to conditions of prisons in India - By
instant order this Court held: Prisoners like all human beings deserve
to be treated with dignity - To give effect to that, certain positve
directions passed - Undertrial Review Committee in every District
c directed to hold meetings periodically and follow up the discussions
with appropriate steps for release of undertrial prisoners and
convicts - The Committee to also look into aspects pertaining to
effective implementation of s.436 and s.436A of C~P.C - Member
Secretary of State Legal Services Authority of every Stare directed
D to ensure that an adequate number of competent lawyers are
empaneled to assist undertrial prisoners and convicts - Secretary
of District Legal Services Authority directed to look into the issue
of release of undertrial prisoners in compoundable offences - Jail
Authorities directed to ensure proper and effective utilisation of
available funds for improving quality living conditions of prisoners
E - Ministry of Home Affairs to ensure that Management Information
System is in place at the earliest in all the Central and District Jails
for wom~n and conduct an annual review of implememation of Model
Prison Manual 2016 - Remaining issues particularly those relating
to unnatural deaths in jails, adequacy of staff and training of staff
F
would be considered on next date of hearing - Constitution of India,
1950-Art.21 - Cod~ of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - ss.436, 436A,
Model Prison Manual - Held: Is a detailed document
consisting of as many as 32 chapters that deal with a variety of
issues including custodial management, medical care, education of
G prisoners, vocational training and skill development programmes,
legal aid, welfare of prisoners, after care and rehabilitation etc.
Manual in case of juveniles - Notice issued to the Secretary,
Ministry of Women and Child Developme/1/ to prepare a manual in
respect of juveniles who are in custody either in observation Homes
H
1090
RE-INHUMAN CONDITIONS IN 1382 PRISONS 1091

or Special Homes of Safety in terms of Juvenile Justice (Care and A
Protection of Children) Act, 2015.
Simi/ Batra (Il) v. Delhi Administration (1980) 3
SCC 488: 1980 (2) SCR 557; Rama Murthy v. State of
Karnataka (1997) 2 SCC 642; T. K. Gopal v. State of
Kamataka (2000) 6 SCC 168: 2000 (3) SCR 1040 - B
referred to.
Case Law Reference
1980 (2) SCR 557 referred to. Para2
(1?97) 2 sec 642 referred to. Para4 c
2000 (3) SCR 1040 referred to. Paras
CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION: Writ Petition (Civil) No.
406 of2013
Gaurav Agrawal (A.C.) for the Petitioners.
D
Sushma Suri for the Respondent.
The Order of the Court was delivered by
MADAN B. LOKUR, J. I. Prison reforms have been the
subject matter of discussion and decisions rendered by this Court from
time to time over the last 35 years. Unfortunately, even though Article E
21 ofthe Constitution requires a life of dignity for all persons, little appears
to have changed on the ground as far as prisoners are concerned and
we are once again required to deal with issues relating to prisons in the
country and their reform. "
2. As far back as in 1980, this Court had occasion to deal with the F
rights of prisoners inSu11il Batra (II) v. DelfliAd111i11istratio11.' In that
decision, this Court gave a very obvious answer to the question whether
prisoners are persons and whether they are entitled to fundamental rights
while in custody, although there may be a shrinkage in the fundamental
rights. This is what this Court had to say in this regard: G
"Are prisoners persons? Yes, of course. To answer in the negative
is to convict the nation and the Constitution of dehumanization
and to repudiate the world legal order, which now recognises rights

1
<1980) 3 sec 488 H
1092 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [20 I 6] I S.C.R.

A of prisoners in the International Covenant on Prisoners' Rights to
which our country has signed assent. In Batra case,' this Court
has rejected the hands-off doctrine and it has been ruled that
fundamental rights do not flee the person as he enters the prison
although they may suffer shrinkage necessitated by incarceration.
B 3. A little later in the aforesaid decision, this Court pointed out the
double handicap that prisoners face; the first being that most prisoners
belong to the weaker sections of society and the second being that since
they are confined in a walled-off world their voices are inaudible. This is
what this Court had to say in this regard:

c "Prisoners are peculiarly and doubly handicapped. For one thing,
most prisoners belong to the weaker segment, in poverty, literacy,
social station and the like. Secondly, the prison house is a walled-
off world which is incommunicado for the human world, with the
result that the bonded inmates are invisible, their voices inaudible,
their injustices unheeded. So it is imperative, as implicit in Article
D 2 I, that life or liberty, shall not be kept in suspended animation or
congealed into animal existence without the freshening flow of
fair procedure."
4. In Rama Murthy v. State of Karnataka' this Court identified
as many as nine issues facing prisons and needing reforms. They are:
E
(i) over-crowding;
(ii) Delay in trial;
(iii) Torture and ill-treatment;
(iv) Neglect of health and hygiene;
F
(v) Insubstantial food and inadequate clothing;
(vi) Prison vices;
(vii) Deficiency in communication;
G (viii) Streamlining ofjail visits;
(ix) Management of open air prisons.

2
( 1978) 4 sec 494
H '(I997)2SCC642
RE-INHUMAN CONDITIONS IN 1382 PRISONS 1093
[MADAN B. LOKUR, J.]

This Court expressed the view that these major problems need A
immediate attention, Unfortunately, we are still struggling with a resolution
of at least some of these problems.
5. Jn T. K. Gopa/ v. State of Karnataka' this Court advocated a
therapeutic approach in dealing with the criminal tendencies.of prisoners.
It was pointed out that there could be several factors that lead a prison.er B
to commit a crime but nevertheless a prisoner is required to be treated
as a human being entitled to all the basic human rights, human dignity
and human sympathy. It was pointed out that it is this philosophy that
has persuaded this Court in a series of decisions to project the need for
prison reforms. This is what this Court had to say:
c
"The therapeutic approach aims at curing the criminal tendencies
which were the product of a diseased psychology. There may be
many factors, including family problems. We are not concerned
with those factors as therapeutic approach has since been treated
as an effective method of punishment which not only satisfies the . ·
requirements of law that a criminal should be punished and the D
punishment prescribed must be meted out to him, but also reforms
the criminal through various processes, the most fundamental of
which is that in spite of having committed a crime, maybe a heinous
crime, he should be treated as a human being entitled to all the
basic human rights, human dignity and human sympathy. It was E
under thi~ theory that this Court in a stream of decisions, projected
the need for prison reforms, the need to acknowledge the vital
fact that the prisoner, after being lodged in jail, does not lose his
fundamental rights or basic human rights and that he must be
treated with compassion and sympathy."
F
6. In this background, a letter on 13'" June, 2013 addressed by
Justice R.C. Lahoti, a former Chief Justice oflndia to Hon'ble the Chief
Justice of India relating to conditions in prisons is rather disturbing. Justice
R.C. Lahoti invited attention to the inhuman conditions prevailing in 1382
prisons in India as reflected in a Graphic Story appearing in Dainik
Bhaskar (National Edition) on 24'h March, 2013. A photocopy of the G
Graphic Story was attached to the letter.
·Justice R.C. Lahoti pointed out that the stpry highlights:

• (2000) 6 sec 168 H
1094 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2016] I S.C.R.

A (i) Overcrowding of prisons;
(ii) Unnatural death of prisoners;
(iii) Gross inadequacy of staff and
(iv) Available staff being untrained or inadequately trained.
B 7. Justice R.C. Lahoti also pointed out thatthe State cannot disown
its liability to the life and safety of a prisoner once in custody and that
there were hardly any schemes for reformation for first time offenders
and prisoners in their youth and to save them from coming into contact
with hardened prisoners.
c 8. Justice R.C. Lahoti ended the letter by submitting that the
Graphic Story raised an issue that needed to be taken note of and dealt
with in public interest by this Court and that he was inviting the attention
of this Court in his capacity as a citizen of the country. We may say that
Justice R.C. Lahoti has brought an important issue to the forefront,
dispelling the view:
D
"Judges rarely express concern for the inhumane treatment that
the person being sentenced is likely to face from fellow prisoners
and prison officials, or that time in prison provides poor preparation
for a productive life afterwards. Courts rarely consider tragic
personal pasts that may be partly responsible for criminal behavior,
E
or how the communities and families of a defendant will suffer
during and long after his imprisonment."'
9. By an order dated S'h July, 2013 the letter was registered as a
public interest writ petition and the Registry of this Court was directed
to take steps to issue notice to the appropriate authorities after obtaining
F
a list from the office of the learned Attorney General.
I 0. In reply to the notice issued by this Court, several States and
Union Territories gave their response either in the form of
communications addressed to the Registry of this Court or in the form of
affidavits. It is not necessary for us to detail each of the responses.
G Suffice it to say that on the four issues raised by Justice R.C. Lahoti
there is general consensus that the prisons (both Central and District)

~Decency, Dignity, and Desert: Restoring Ideals of Humane Punishment to Constitutional
Discourse by Eva S. Nilsen. Boston University School ofLaY.' Working Paper Series,
H Public Law & Legal Theory Working Paper No. 07-33
RE-INHUMAN CONDITIONS IN 1382 PRISONS 1095
[MADAN B. LOKUR, J.]

are over-crowded, some unnatural deaths have taken place in some A
prisons, there is generally a shortage of staff and it is not as ifall of them
are adequately and suitably trained to handle issues relating to the
management of prisons and prisoners and finally that steps have been
taken for the reformation and rehabilitation of prisoners. However, a
closer scrutiny of the responses received indicates that by and large the
B
steps taken are facile and lack adequate sincerity in implementation.
11. In view of the above, the Social Justice Bench of this Court
passed an order on 13'h March, 2015 requiring the Union of India to
furnish certain information primarily relating to the more serious issue of
over-crowding in prisons and improving the living conditions of prisoners.
The order passed by the Social Justice Bench on l 3'h March, 2015 reads c
as follows:-
"We have heard learned Additional Solicitor General and would
like information on the following issues: ·
(i) The utilization of the grant ofRs.609 crores under the 13th D
Finance Commission for the improvement of conditions in·
prisons.
(ii) The grant to the States in respect of the prisons under the
14th Finance Commission.
(iii) Steps taken and being taken by the Central Government as E
well as by the State Governments for effective
implementation.ofSection 436A of the Code of Criminal
Procedure, 1973.
(iv) Steps taken and being taken by the Central Government
and the State Governments for effective implementation of F
the Explanation to Section 436 of the Code of Criminal
Procedure, 1973 and the number of persons in custody due
to their inability to provide adequate security/surety for their
release on bail.
(v) The number of persons in custody who have committed G
compoundable offences and are languishing in custody.
(vi) Steps taken. for the effective implementation of the
Repatriation of Prisoners Act, 2003._
We expect all the State Governments to fully cooperate
H
1096 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2016] I S.C.R.

A with the Central Government in this regard since the matter
involves Article 21 of the Constitution and to furnish necessary
information within three weeks.
List the matter on 24th April, 2015."
12. In compliance with the aforesaid order, the Union of India
B through the Ministry of Home Affairs filed a detailed affidavit dated 23"'
April, 2015. It was stated in the affidavit that all States and Union
Territories were asked to provide the information as required by this
Court but in spite of reminders and meetings, the information had not
been received from the State ofUttarakhand and the Union Territories
c of Dadra & Nagar Have Ii, Daman & Diu and Lakshadweep.
13. It was stated that one of the problems faced in aggregating
the information that had been received was that management information
systems were not in place in a comprehensive manner. To remedy this
situation an e-prisons application was being designed so that all essential
D data could be centrally aggregated. It was stated in the affidavit that a
draft project report was being prepared through a project management
consultancy so that an e-prisons application could be rolled out with
integrated information in all States and Union Territories comprehensively
for better monitoring of the status of prisoners, particularly undertrial
prisoners.
E
14. In response to the first issue, it was pointed out in the affidavit
in the form of a tabular statement that funds were made available under
the 13"' Finance Commission for the improvement of conditions in prisons
in respect of several States. We are surprised that no grant was allotted
in as many as 19 States and in the States where grants were allotted, the
F utilization was less than I 00%, except in the State ofTripura.
IS. With regard to the grant under the 14'' Finance Commission,
it was stated that the 14'' Finance Commission had reported that the
States have the appropriate fiscal space to provide for the additional
expenditure needs as per their requirements. The 14'' Finance
G Commission did not make any specific fund allocation in favour of the
Central Government but the States had projected their demands
- ·individually and the tabular statement in that regard is annexed to the
affidavit. As far as the Union Territories are concerned, apart from
Delhi and Puducherry none of the Union Territories had projected any
demand.
H
RE-INHUMAN CONDITIONS IN 1382 PRiSONS 1097
[MADAN B. LOKUR, J.]

16. With regard to the third issue regarding effective implementation A
of Section 436A of the Code of Criminal Procedure, (for short the
Cr.P.C.), the affidavit stated that an advisory had been issued by the
Ministry of Home Affairs of the Government oflndia on 17'" January,
2013 to all the States and Union Territories to implement the provisions
of Section 436Aofthe Cr.P.C. to reduce overcrowding in prisons. Among
B
the measures suggested in this regard by the Ministry of Home Affairs
was the constitution of a Review Committee in every district with the
District Judge in the Chair with the District Magistrate and the
Superintendent of Police as Members to meet every three months and
review the cases ofundertri·al prisoners. The Jail Superintendents were
also required to conduct a survey of all cases where undertrial prisoners c
h~ve completed more than one fourth of the maximum sentence and
send a report in this regard to the District Legal Services Committee
constituted under The Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987 as well as to
the Review Committee. It was also suggested that the prison authorities
should educate undertrials of their right to bail and the District Legal
D
Services c·ommittee should provide legal aid through empanelled lawyers
to the undertrial prisoners for their release on bail or for the reduction of
the bail amount. The Home Department of the States was also requested
to develop a management information system to ascertain the jail-wise
progress in tllis regard.
17. The aforesaid advisory dated 17'" January, 2013 was followed E
up through a letter of the Union Home Minister to the Chief Ministers/
Lieutenant Governors on 3•• September, 2014. It was pointed out i.n the
letter that as per the statistics provided by the National Crime Records
Bureau (NCRB) as on 31 ".December, 2013 the number of undertrial
prisoners was 67 .6% of the entire prison population' and that the F
percentage was unacceptably high. In this context it was suggested
that the provisions of Section 436 of the Cr.P.C. a~ well as Section 436A
of the Cr.P.C. had to be made use of. It was also suggested that steps
be taken to utilize the provisions of plea bargaining, the establishment of
fast track courts, holding of Lok Adalats and ensuring adequate means
for the productiOn of the accused before the Court directly or through G
video conferenoing.
18. Yet another letter was sent to the Director General of Prisons
·· of all States/Union Territories on 22°• September, 2014 by the Ministry
ofHome Affairs drawing attention to the directions of this Court in Bllim
H
1098 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2016] I S.C.R.

A Sinf[h y. Union o_flndia dated 5"' September, 2014 6 relating to Section
436A of the Cr.P.C. and to take necessary steps to comply with the
orders passed by th is Court.
19. In a similar vein, yet another advisory was issued by the
Government of India on 27•h September, 2014. It was averred in the
B affidavit that as a result of these advisories and communications, some
undertrial prisoners have been released in implementation of the
provisions of Section 436A of the Cr.P.C.
20. With regard to the fourth issue concerning the effective
implementation of Section 436 of the Cr.P.C., the affidavit stated that an
c advisory was issued way back on 9'h May, 2011 in which it was pointed
out, imer alia, that prison overcrowding compels prisoners to be kept
under conditions that are unacceptable in light of the United Nations
Standard Minimum Rules far Treatment of Offenders to whil;h India is
the signatory. It was pointed that as per the statistics prepared by the
NCRB as on 31" December, 2008 prisons in India are overcrowded to
D the extent of 129%. The advisory highlighted some measures.taken by
some of the States to reduce the number ofundertrial prisoners, including
their release under the provisions of the Probation of Offenders Act,
1958 and encouraging NGOs in association with District Legal Services
Committees to arrange legal aid for unrepresented undertrial prisoners
E as well as to implement the guidelines issued by the Bombay High Court
in Rajendra Bidkar v. State of Maharashtra, CWP No. 3 86 of 2004
(unreported decision).
21. With regard to the fifth issue relating to the number of persons
who have been languishing in jails in compoundable offences, a chart
F was annexed to the affidavit which indicated, by and large, that quite a
few States had taken no effective steps in this regard particularly Andhra
Pradesh, Assam, Chhattisgarh, Haryana, Kerala, Mizoram, Nagaland,
Odisha, Punjab, Rajasthan, Telangana, Tripura and Uttar Pradesh. The
reason why many undertrial prisoners had not been released was their
inability to provide security and surety for their release. The steps taken
G to have these prisoners released from custody were not indicated in the
affidavit.
22. With regard to the effective implementation of the Repatriation
of Prisoners Act, 2003 it was stated that agreements on transfer of

6
H MANU/SC/0786/2014
RE-INHUMAN CONDITIONS IN 1382 PRISONS 1099
[MADAN B. LOKUR, J.]

sentenced persons have been bilaterally signed with 25 countries but the A
agreements are operational after ratification by both sides only with
respect to I 8 countries. In addition, transfer arrangements have been
made with I 9 countries under the Inter-American Convention on Serving
Criminal Sentences Abroad thereby making the total number of countries
with which transfer arrangements have been made for prisoners to 37
B
countries.
23. Keeping in view the affidavit dated 23" April, 2015 filed by
the Ministry of Home Affairs and the somewhat lukewarm response of
the States and Union Territories, the Social Justice Bench passed the
following directions on 24'" April, 2015:
c
"We have perused the affidavit filed by the Ministry of Home
Affairs on 23rd April, 2015 and have heard learned counsel.
The admitted position is 67% of all the prisoners in jails are
under trial prisoners. This is an extremely high percentage and
the number of such prisoners is said to be about 2, 78,000 as on D
3 Jst December, 2013.
Keeping this in mind and the various suggestions that have
been made in the affidavit, we are of the view that the following
directions need to be issued:
I. A Priso·ners Management System (a sort of Management E
Information System) has been in use in Tihar Jail for quite
some time, as stated in the affidavit. The Ministry of Home
Affairs should carefully study this application software and
get back to us on the next date of hearing with any
suggestions or modifications in this regard, so that the
F
software can be improved and then deployed in other jails
all over the country, if necessary.
2. We would like the assistance of the National Legal Services
Authority (NALSA) in this matter of crucial importance
concerning prisoners in the country. We direct the Member
G
Secretary ofNALSA to appoint a senior judicial .officer as
the nodal officer to assist us and deal with the issues that
have arisen in this case.
3. For the purpose of implementation of Section 436A of the
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short "the Code"),
H
1100 SUPREME COURT REPORTS (2016] I S.C.R.

A the Ministry of Home Affairs has issued an Advisory on
17th January, 2013. One of the requirements of the Advisory
is that an Under Trial Review Committee should be set up
in every district. The composition of the Und.erTrial Review
Committee is the DistrictJudge, as Chairperson, the District
Magistrate and the District Superintendent of Police as
B
members.
The Member Secretary ofNALSA will, in coordination with
the State Legal Services Authority and the Ministry of Home
Affairs, urgently ensure that such an Under Trial Review
Committee is established in every District, within one month.
c The next meeting of each such Committee should be held
on or about 30th June, 2015.
4. In the meeting to be held on or about 30th June, 2015, the
Under Trial Review Committee should consider the cases
of all under trial prisoners who are entitled to the benefit of
D Section 436Aofthe Code. The Ministry of Home Affairs
has indicated that in case of multiple offences having
different periods of incarceration, a prisoner should be
released after half the period of incarceration is undergone
for the offence with the greater punishment. In our opinion,
.while this may be the requirement of Section 436A of the
E Code, it will be appropriate ifin a case of multiple offences,
a review is conducted after half the sentence of the lesser
offence is completed by the under trial prisoner. It is not
necessary or compulsory that an under trial prisoner must
remain in custody for at least half the period of his maximum
F sentence only because the trial has not been completed in
time.
5. The Bureau of Police Research and Development had
circulated a Model Prison Manual in 2003, as stated in the
affidavit. About 12 years have gone by and since then there
has been a huge change in circumstances and availability
G
of technology. We direct the Ministry of Home Affairs to
· ensure .that the Bureau of Police Research and
Development undertakes a review of the Model Prison
Manual within a period of three months. We are told that a
review has already commenced. We expect it to be
H completed within three months.
RE-INHUMAN CONDITIONS JN 1382 PRISONS 1101
[MADAN B. LOKUR, J.]

6. The Member Secretary ofNALSA should issue directions A
to the State Legal Services Authorities to urgently take up
cases of prisoners who are unable to. furnish bail and are
stm in custody for that re.ason. From the figures that have
been annexed to the affidavit filed by the Ministry, we find
that there are a large number of such prisoners who are B
continuing in custody only because of their poverty. This is·
certainly not the spirit of the law and poverty cannot be a
ground for incarcerating a person. As per the figures
provided by the Ministry of Home Affairs, in the State of
Uttar Pradesh, there are as many as 530 such persons.
The State Legal Services Authorities should instruct the C
panel lawyers to urgently meet such prisoners, discuss the
case with them and move appropriate applications before
the appropriate court for release of such persons unless
they are required in custody for some other purposes.
7. There are a large number of compoundable offences for D
which persons are in custody. No attempt seems to have
been made to compound those offences ·and instead the
alleged offender has been incarcerated. The State Legal
Services Authorities are directed, through the Member
Secretary ofNALSA to urgently take up the issue with the
panel lawyers so that wherever the offences can be E
compounded, immediate steps should be taken and
wherever the offences cannot be compounded, efforts
should be made to expedite th~ disposal of those cases or
at least efforts should be made to have the persons in custody
released therefrom at the earliest. · F
A copy of this order be given immediately to the Member
Secretary, NALSA for compliance.
List the matter on 7th August, 2015 for further directions
and updating the progress made.
G
For the present, the presence of learned counsel for the
States and Union Territories is not necessary. Accordingly, their
presence is dispensed with."
24. The order dated 24"' April, 2015 made a pointed reference to
the extremely high percentage of undertrial prisoners and the total number
H
1102 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2016] I S.C.R.

A of prisoners as on 31" December, 2013.
25. Reference was also made to the fact that the Bureau of Police
Research and Development had circulated a Model Prison Manual in
2003 but since about 12 years had gone by, the Ministry of Home Affairs
was directed to ensure that the Bureau of Police Research and
B Development undertakes a review of the Model Prison Manual within a
period of three months.
26. Directions were also issued for the assistance of the National
Legal Services Authority (NALSA) to assist the Social Justice Bench
and deal with the issues that had arisen in the case.
C 27. A direction was also issued to ensure that the Under Trial
Review Committee is established within one month in all districts and
the next meeting of that Committee in each district should be held on or
about 30•h June, 2015. NALSA was required to take up the issue of
undertrial prisoners particularly in the State of Uttar Pradesh where as
D many as 530 persons were in custody only because of their poverty.
28. Pursuant to the aforesaid order and directions, NALSA filed
a compliance report on 4'h August, 2015 in which it was stated that steps
have been taken to ensure that Under Trial Review Committees are set
up in every district and the State Legal Services Authorities had also
E been asked to take up the cases of prisoners who were unable to furnish
bail bonds and to move appropriate applications on their behalf.
29. The compliance report stated that with regard to the Prisoners
Management System, the MinistryofHomeAffairs had already appointed
a project management consultant to prepare a detailed project report for
thee-Prisons project. It was stated that there were four prison software
F
applications that had been developed by (i) National Informatics Centre
(ii) Goa Electronic Ltd. (iii) Gujarat Government through TCS and (iv)
Phoenix for Prison Management System in Haryana. The various
applications would be evaluated and discussed in a conference of the
Director General (Prisons)/lnspector General (Prisons) to be held on
G 2o•h August, 2015.
30. The compliance report also indicated a break-up of the meetings
of the Under Trial Review Committees that had been set up in the various
States and that reports of the meeting that were directed to be held on or
about 30'h June, 2015 were still awaited from a few States and Union
H Territories.
RE-INHUMAN CONDITIONS IN 1382 PRISONS 1103
[MADAN B. LOKUR, J.]

3 I. As regards the Model Prison Manual it was submitted that a A
draft had been prepared and was circulated for comments and a further
meeting was scheduled to be held in August, 20 I 5 to finalize the draft.
32. With regard to the cases· of undertrial prisoners who were
unable to furnish bail bonds it was stated that as many as 3470 such
persons were in custody due to their inability to furnish bail bonds and a B
maximum number of such undertrial prisoners were in the State of
Maharashtra, that is, 797 undertrial prisoners. It was stated that as
many as 3278 undertrial prisoners were those who were involved in
compoundable offences and efforts were being made to expedite the
disposal of their cases.
c
33. Keeping in view the compliance report as well as some of the
gaps that appeared necessary to be filled up, the Social Justice Bench
passed an order dated 7'h August, 2015 requiring, inter alia. the Under
Trial Review Committee to include the Secretary of the District Legal
Services Committee as one of the members of the Review Committee.
The Ministry of Home Affairs was directed to issue an appropriate order D
in this regard.
34. With regard to the Model Prison Manual, it was suggested to
the learned Additional Solicitor General appearing on behalf of the Union
oflndia that the composition of the Committee looking into the Model
Prison Manual should be a multicdisciplinary body involving members E
from civil society and NGOs as well as other experts. It was also directed
thatthe Model Prison Manual should look into providing a creche for the
children of prisoners.
35. With regard to the large number ofundertrial prisoners in the
State of Maharashtra, it was directed that the matter should be reviewed F
and an adequate number of legal aid lawyers may be appointed so that
necessary steps could be taken with regard to the release of undertrial
prisoners in accordance with law, particularly those who had been granted
bail but were unable to furnish the bail bond due to their poverty.
The order dated 7•h August, 2015 reads as follows:- G
"We have gone through the compliance report filed on behalf
ofNALSA and we appreciate the work done by NALSA within
the time frame prescribed.
We find from the report that the Under Trial Review
H
1104 SUPREME COURT REPORTS (2016] I S.C.R.

A Committees have been established in large number of districts but
they have not been established in all the districts across the country.
Mr. Rajesh Kumar Goel, Director, NALSA - the nodal officer
will look into the matter and ensure that, wherever necessary, the
Under Trial Review Committee should be established and should
meet regularly.
B
We are told that the Under Trial Review Committee consists
of the District Judge, the Superintendent of Police and the District
Magistrate. Since the issues pertaining to under trial prisoners are
also of great concern of the District Legal Services Authorities,
we direct that the Under Trial Review committee should also have
c the Secretary of the District Legal Services Authority as one of
the members of the Committee. The Ministry of Home Affairs
will issue a necessary order in this regard to the Superintendent
of Police to associate the Secretary of the District Legal Services
Authority in such meetings.
D It is stated that so far as a software for the prisoners is
concerned, the Ministry of Home Affairs has appointed a Project
Management Consultant and at present there are four kinds of
software in existence in the country with regard to prison
management. It is stated that a meeting will be held on 20"' August,
E 2015 with the Director General (Prisons)/Inspector General
(Prisons) to evaluate the existing application software.
We expect an early decision in the matter and early
implementation of the decision that is taken.
It is stated that a Model Prison Manual is being looked
F into since.the earlier Manual was of considerable vintage. We are
told that a meeting is likely to be held towards the end of this
month to finalize the Model Prison Manual.
Learned ASG is unable to inform us about the composition
of the Committee that is looking into the Model Prison Manual.
G We have suggested to him (and this suggestion has been accepted)
that a multi-disciplinary body including members from Civil Society,
NGOs concerned with under trial prisoners as also experts from
some other disciplines, including academia and whose assistance
would be necessary, should also be associated in drafting the
comprehensive Model Prison Manual.
H
RE-INHUMAN CONDITIONS IN 1382 PRISONS 1105
[MADAN B. LOKUR, J.]

To the extent possible, the Model Prison Manual should be A
finalized at the earliestand preferably within a month or two, but
after having extensive and intensive consultations with a multi-
disciplinary body as above.
In the Model Prison Manual, the Ministry of Home Affairs
should also look into the possibility of having a creche for the B
children of prisoners, particularly women prisoners as it exists in
Tihar Jail.
We find that the number of under trial prisoners in the State
of Maharashtra is extremely large and we also think that there
are not adequate number of legal aid lawyers to look into the c
grievances of under trial prisoner. Mr. Rajesh Kumar Goel,
Director, NALSA says on behalf ofNALSA that necessary steps
will be taken to appoint adequate number of legal aid lawyers so
that necessary steps can be taken with regard to the release of
under trial prisoners in accordance with law including those who
have been granted bail but are unable to furnish the bail bond. D

List the matter on 18th September, 2015."
36. When the matter was taken up by the Social Justice Bench on
J 81h September, 2015, Mr. Gaurav Agrawal, Advocate was appointed as
Amicus Curiae to assist the Social Justice Bench. E
37. On that date, the learned Additional Solicitor General informed
the Social Justice Bench that the Ministry of Home Affairs had duly
written to the Directors General of all the States and Union Territories
to ensure that the Secretary of the District Legal Services Committee is
included as a member in the Under Trial Review Committee. The learned
F
Additional Solicitor General also informed that the Model Prison Manual
was likely to be made available sometime in the middle of December,
2015.
38. It was pointed out on behalfofNALSA by Mr. Rajesh Kumar
Goel that some clarity was required with respect to paragraph 4 of the
G
order dated 24" April, 2015. In view of this request, it was clarified that
there is no mandate that a person who has completed half the period of
sentence, in the case of multiple offences, should be released .. This was
entirely for the Under Trial Review Committee to decide and there was
no direction given for release in this regard.
H
1106 SUPREME <. •URT REPORTS [2016] I S.C.R.

A 39. With regard to the large number of undertrial prisoners in
Maharashtra who were entitled to bai I, it was submitted that out of 797
such undertrial prisoners nearly 503 had been released and that steps
were being taken with regard to the remaining undertrial prisoners.
40. The order passed by the Social Justice Bench on 18'"
B September, 2015 reads as follows:-
"This petition pertains to what has been described as
inhuman conditions in 13 82 prisons across the country.
On our request, Mr. Gaurav Agrawal, Advocate has agreed
to assist us in the matter as Amicus Curiae since the complaint
c was received by Post. The Registry should give a copy each of
all the documents in this matter to Mr. Gaurav Agrawal.
Learned Additional Solicitor General has drawn our attention
to the order dated 7th August, 2015 and in compliance thereof he
has stated that the Ministry of Home Affairs has written to the
D Directors General ofall the States/Union Territories on 14th August,
2015 to ensure that the Secretary of the District Legal Services
Committee is included as a member in the Under Trial Review
Committee. A similar letter was written by NALSA on I Ith August,
2015. NALSA should follow up on this and ensure that it is
effectively represented in the Under Trial Review Committee.
E
It is not yet clear whether the Under Trial Review
Committee has been set up in every District. Learned Additional
Solicitor General and Mr. Rajesh Kumar Goel, Director, NALSA
will look into this and let us know the progress on the next date of
hearing.
F
As far as the software for Prison Management is
concerned, it is stated by the learned Additional Solicitor General
that all the Directors General of Police have been asked to intimate
which of the four available software is acceptable to them. He
further states that the software will be integrated on the cloud so
G that all information can be made available regardless of which
software is being utilized. He expects the needful to be done within
a period of about two months.
We expect the Directors General of Police in every State/
Union Territory to respond expeditiously to any request made by
H the Ministry of Home Affairs in this regard.
RE-INHUMAN CONDITIONS IN 1382 PRISONS 1107
[MADAN B. LOKUR, J.]

With regard to the Model Prison Manual of 2003, it is A
stated by the learned Additional Solicitor General that meetings
have been held in this regard and it is expected that the Model
Prison Manual will be made available by sometime in the middle
of December, 2015. He states that people from academia as well
as NGOs are associated in the project. It is expected that the
B
Prison Manual will also take care of establishing a creche in respect
of women prisoners who have children.
With regard tci the release of under trial prisoners,
particularly in the States of Uttar Pradesh and Maharashtra, as
mentioned in ourorder dated 24th April, 2015, learned Additional
Solicitor General says that at the present moment he does not
c
have any instructions in this regard, but the Ministry of Home
Affairs will write to the State Governments/Union Territories to
take urgent steps in terms of our orders.
Mr. Rajesh Kumar Goel, Director, NALSA says that legal
. aid lawyers have been instructed to take steps for the possible D
release of under trial prisoners in accordance with law.
Mr. Rajesh Kumar Goel has also drawn our attention to
paragraph 4 of the order dated 24th April, 2015. We make it clear
thatthere is no mandate that a person who has completed half the
period of his sentence, in the case of multiple offences, should be E
released. This is entirely for the Under Trial Review Committee
and the competent authority to decide and there is absolutely no
direction given by this Court for release of such under trials. Their
case will have to be considered by the Under Trial Review
Committee and the competent authority in accordance with law. F
Mr. Rajesh Kumar Goel, Director, NALSA says that steps
are being taken to appoint an adequate number of panel lawyers.
With reference to the release of under trial prisoners, he
says that in the State of Maharashtra, as per the information
available, 797 under trial prisoners were entitled to bail and with G
the efforts of the State Legal Services Authority, nearly 503 have
since been released. Steps are being taken with regard to the
remaining under trial prisoners.
Mr. Rajesh Kumar Goel, Director, NALSA says that the
Member Secretaries of the State Legat Services Authority will be H
l 108 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2016] I S.C.R.

.A advised to compile relevant information with regard to the cases
of compoundable offences pending in the States so that they can
also be disposed of at the earliest. We expect the States of Uttar
Pradesh and Maharashtra to expeditiously respond to the letter
written by NALSA since the maximum number of cases pertaining
to compoundable offences are pending in these States.
B
List the matter on 16th October, 2015 ."
41. Pursuant to the aforesaid order, NALSA filed another
compliance report dated J 4•h October, 2015 in which it was stated that
an Under Trial Review Committee had been set up in every district.
c However, the annexure to the compliance report indicated that no
information was available from the State of Jammu & Kashmir and in
some States particularly Gujarat and Uttar Pradesh and the Union
Territory of Andaman & Nicobar Islands, the Secretary of the District
Legal Services Committee was not made a member of the Review
Committee.
D
42. It was also stated that the State Legal Services Authority had
been requested to appoint an adequate number of panel lawyers and to
instruct them to take steps for the early release of undertrial prisoners.
43. When the matter was taken up on J6•h October, 2015 the
E Social Justice Bench expressed its distress that only three States had
responded to the information sought by the Ministry of Home Affairs
with regard to holding the quarterly meeting of the Under Trial Review
Committee on or before JO•h September, 2015. Learned counsel
appearing for the Union of India stated that the matter would be taken
up with all the State Governments with due seriousness and it would be
F ensured that such meetings are held regularly. It was also stated that
the latest status report would be filed in the second week of January,
2016.
44. Learned G111icus curiae informed the Social Justice Bench
· that the Under Trial Review Committee had been set up in every district
G and a representative of the District Legal·Services Committee was
included in the said Committee.
The order dated I 6'h October, 2015 reads as follows:-
"It is very disconcerting to hear from learned counsel for
the Union of India that there is no information available except
H from three States with regard to the release ofunder trial prisoners.
RE-INHUMAN CONDITIONS IN 1382 PRISONS I 109
[MADAN B. LOKUR, J.)

A meeting of the Under Trial Review Committee was A I
I
I supposed to be held on or before-30th September, 2015, but only f

I three States have responded to the information sought by the
Ministry of Home Affairs, Government oflndia. · I
I Learned counsel for the Union oflndia says that the matter
will now be taken up very seriously with all the State Governments
and the Union Territories and it will be ensured that the meetings
B

are regularly held in terms of the Advisories given by the Ministry
of Home Affairs at least once in every three months.
Learned counsel for the Union of India also says that the
latest status report will be tiled in the second week of January,
c
2016.
In the meanwhile, learned amicus curiae informs us that
the Under Trial Review Committee has been sef up in every
District and a representative of the District Legal Services
Authority has been included in all the Under Trial Review
Committees and, therefore, to this extent the order dated 18th D
September, 2015 has been complied with.
List the matter on 29th January, 2016. We make it clear
that leanied counsel for the Union oflndia should be fully briefed
in all aspects of the case." •
E
45. In compliance with the order passed on 16"' October, 2015 an
affidavit dated 22nd January, 2016 was filed by the Ministry of Home
Affairs in which it was stated that ·a detailed evaluation of the software
for the e-Prisons Project had been completed and guidelines had also
been circulated to all the States for their proposals and for exercising
their option for selt;cting the appropriate software. F
46. It was stated in the affidavit that a provision for funds had
been made for the application software from the Crime and Criminal
Tracking Network & System (CCTNS) project and an amount of
Rs.227.01 crores had been approved for the implementation of thee-
J .. ·'
Prisons Project. It .was statecl &at !he e-Prisons proposals had been G
received from seven States atid other States/Union Territories had been
asked to expedite their proposal for evaluation by the Ministry of Home
Affairs.
47. With regard to the Model Prison Manual, it was stated that ·
the revised Model Prison Manual had been approved by the competent H
1110 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2016] I S.C.R.

A authority and it was circulated to all States and Union Territories. The
revised manual also included a provision for a suitable creche for the
children of women inmates in the prison.
48. With regard to the quarterly meetings of the Under Trial Review
Committee, the affidavit disclosed the dates on which such Committees
B had met but on a perusal of the chart annexed to the affidavit there is a
clear indication that not every such Committee met on a quarterly basis,
This is most unfortunate.
49. With regard to the undertrial prisoners who could be considered
for release under the provisions of Section 436A of the Cr.P.C., some
c progress had been made except in the States of Assam, Bihar,
Chhattisgarh, Goa, Karnataka, Meghalaya, West Bengal, and the Union
Territories of Dadra & Nagar Haveli and Lakshadweep. It was stated
in the affidavit that notwithstanding the lack of detailed information it did
appear that due to the institutionalization of the exercise, the number of
undertrial prisoners eligible for release under Section 436A of the Cr.P.C.
D had been considerably reduced in some States.
50. In the hearing that took place on 29"' January, 2016 it was
pointed out that considerable progress had been made inasmuch as the
Model Prison Manual had been finalized and perhaps circulated to all
the States and Union Territories; Under Trial Review Committees had
E been set up in every district but unfortunately many of such Committees
were not meeting on a regular basis every quarter; the application
software for prison management had more or less been identified but a
final decision was required to be taken in this regard; steps were required
to be taken for the release of undertrial prisoners particularly in .the
F State of Uttar Pradesh and the State of Maharashtra and wherever
necessary, the number of panel lawyers associated with the State Legal
Services Authority/District Legal Services Committee were required to
be increased to meet the requirement of early release of undertrial
prisoners and prisoners who remain in custody due to their poverty and
inability to furnish bail bonds. In addition, it was pointed out that steps
G should be taken to ensure that wherever persons are in custody under
offences that are compoundable, steps should be taken to compound the
offences so that overcrowding in jails is reduced.
51. Has anything changed on the ground? The prison statistics
available as on 31" December, 2014 from the website of the NCRB'
H ' http://ncrb.nic.in
RE-INHUMAN CONDITIONS IN 1382 PRISONS 1111
[MADAN B. J.,OKUR, J.]
"
indicate that as far as overcrowding is concerned, there is no perceptible A
change and in fact the problem of overcrowding has perhaps been
accentuated with the passage oftime. The figures in this regard are as
follows:

Central Jails D.istrict Jails B
Capacity 1,52,312 1,35,439
Actual 1,84,3~0 l.79.o~5
% 121.1% 132.7%
Undertrials 95,519 (51.8%) 1,43,138 (79.7%)

c
52. The maximum overcrowding is in the jail in the Union Territory
ofDadra & Nagar Haveli (331.7%) followed by ~hhattisgarh (258.9%)
and then Delhi (221.6% ).
53. It is clear that in spite of several orders passed by this Court D
from time to time in various petitions, for one reason or another, the
issue ofovercrowding in jails continues to persist and apart from anything
else, appears to have persuaded Justice R.C Lahoti to address a letter
of the Chief Justice oflndia on this specific issue of overcrowding in
prisons. E
54. We cannot forget that thelnternational Covenant on Civil and
Political Rights, to which India is a signatory, provides in Article I 0 that:
"All persons deprived of their liberty shall be treated with humanity and
with respect for the inherent dignity of the human person." Similarly,
Article 5 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR)
F
provides: ''No one shall be subjected to torture or cruel, inhuman or
degrading treatment or punishment." With reference to the UDHR and
the necessity of treating prisoners with dignity and as human beings,
Vivien Stern (now Baroness Stern) says in A Sin Against the Future:
Imprisonment in the World as folh· ,
G
"Detained people are irdudJd because human rights extend to all
human beings. It is a basic tenet of international human rights
law that nothing can put a human being beyond the reach of certain
human rights protections. Some people may be less deserving

H
1112 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2016) 1 S.C.R.

A than others. Some may lose many of their rights through having
been imprisoned through proper and legal procedures. But the
basic rights to life, health, fairness and justice, humane treatment,
dignity and protection from ill treatment or torture remain. There
is a minimum standard for the way a state treats people, whoever
they are. No one should fall below it."'
B
55. In a similar vein, it has been said, with a view to transform
prisons and prison culture:
"Treating prisoners not as objects, but as the human beings they
are, no matter how despicable their prior actions, will demonstrate
c an unflagging commitment to human dignity. It is that commitment
to human dignity that will, in the end, bethe essential underpinning
of any endeavor to transform prison cultures."'
56. The sum and substance of the aforesaid discussion is that
prisoners, like all human beings, deserve to be treated with dignity. To
D give effect to this, some positive directions need to be issued by this
Court and these are as follows:
I. The Under Trial Review Committee in every district should
meet every quarter and the first such meeting should take
place on or before 31" March, 2016. The Secretary of the
E District Legal Services Committee should attend each
meeting of the Under Trial Review Committee and follow
up the discussions with appropriate steps for the release of
undertrial prisoners and convicts who have undergone their
sentence or are entitled to release because of remission
granted to them.
F
2. The Under Trial Review Committee should specifically look
into aspects pertaining to effective implementation of Section
436 of the Cr.P.C. and Section 436A of the Cr.P.C. so that
undertrail prisoners are released at the earliest and those
who cannot furnish bail bonds due to their poverty are not
G subjected to incarceration only for that reason. The Under
Trial Review Committee will also look into issue of
implementation of the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958

8. Vivien Stern, A Sin Against the Future: Imprisonment in the World 192 ( 1998)
9. The Mess We're In: Five Steps To\vards the Transfromation of Prison Cultures by
H Lynn S. Branham. Indiana Law Review. Vol. 44, p. 703. 201 I
RE-INHUMAN CONDITIONS IN 1382 PRISONS 1113
[MADAN B. LOKUR, J.]

particularly with regard to first time offenders so that they A
have a chance of being restored and rehabilitated in society.
3. The Member Secretary of the State Legal Services Authority
of every State will ensure, in coordination with the Secretary
of the District Legal Services Committee in every district,
that an adequate number of competent lawyers are B
empanelled to assist undertrial prisoners and convicts,
particularly the ppoor and indigent, and that legal aid for the
poor does not become poor legal aid.
4. The Secretary of the District Legal Services Committee
will also look into the issue of the release of undertrial c
prisoners in compoundable offences, the effort being to
effectively explore the possibility of compounding offences
rather than requiring a trial to take place.
5. The Director General of Police/Inspector General of Police
in-charge of prisons should ensure that there is proper and D
effective utilization of available funds so that the living
conditions of the prisoners is commensurate with human
dignity. This also includes the issue of their health, hygiene,
food, clothing, rehabilitation etc.
6. The Ministry of Home Affairs will ensure that the E
Management Information System is in place at the earliest
in all the Central and District Jails as well as jails for women
so that there is better and effective management of the
prison and prisoners.
7. The Ministry of Home Affairs will conduct an annual review
F
of the implementation of the Model Prison Manual 2016
for which considerable efforts have been made not only by
senior officers of the Ministry of Home Affairs but also
persons from civil society. The Model Prison Manual 2016
should not be reduced to yet another document that might
be reviewed only decades later, if at all. The annual review G
will also take into consideration the need, if any, of making
changes therein.
8. The Under Trial Review Committee will also look into the
issues raised in the Model Prison Manual 2016 including
regular jail visits as suggested in the said Manual. H
1114 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ' (2016] l S,CR.

A We direct accordingly.
57, A word about the Model Prison Manual is necessary, It is a
detailed document consisting of as many as 32 chapters that deal with a
variety of issues including custodial management, medical care, education
of prisoners, vocational training and skill development programmes, legal
B aid, welfare of prisoners, aftercare and rehabilitation, Board of Visitors,
prison computerization and so on and so forth. It is a composite document
that needs to be implemented with due seriousness and dispatch.
58. Taking a cue from the efforts of the Ministry of Home Affairs
in preparing the Model Prison Manual, it appears advisable and necessary
c to ensure that a similar manual is prepared in respect of juveniles who
are in custody either in Observation Homes or Special Homes or Places
of Safety in terms of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of
Children) Act, 2015.
59. Accordingly, we issue notice to the Secretary, Ministry of
D Women and Child Development, Government of India, returnable on
14"' March, 2016. The purpose of issuance ofnotice to the said Ministry
is to require a manual to be prepared by the said Ministry that will take
into consideration the living conditions and other issues pertaining to
juveniles who are in Observation Homes or Special Homes or Places of
Safety in terms of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children)
E Act,2015.
60, The remaining issues raised before us particularly those relating
to unnatural deaths in jails, inadequacy of staff and training of staff will
be considered on the next date of hearing.
F Devika Gujral Matter pending