Paragraph numbers below are the court’s original numbering, recovered from the source text.
24. The State Government has stated that various requests for sanction of money and identification of suitable land for expansion would be done in the coming months.
25. The AC, in praesenti, does not seek any positive directions to the authorities concerned. However, the AC submits that the timelines be adhered to, both for works in progress as also for analysing new proposals. The State is directed to take note of the afore-stated and proceed accordingly. [2024] 5 S.C.R. In Re-Inhuman Conditions In 1382 Prisons (E) STATE OF JHARKHAND
26. Various recommendations made by the Committee for the 14 Jails (Central/District) have been indicated. It has been stated that pursuant to the recommendations of the Committee, the Government has written to all the Prison Superintendents to seek preparation of estimates from the Jharkhand Police Housing Corporation Limited3 for the works recommended. The State Government has sought information wherever new prisons have been recommended for establishment.
27. The AC has sought directions as under: ‘i) There is urgent need for construction of new jail in Deogarh for which part of the land is also acquired and another part of the land has been earmarked. The Chief Secretary of the State should ensure that necessary steps are taken for process of the construction of new Jail at Deogarh and submit a status report to this Hon’ble Court. ii) As regards other jails are concerned, the State has directed the Superintendent of all jails to get estimates for construction of new wards and/or renovation. It may be (sic) admissible if this process is completed as soon as possible so that the requirement in each of the jails is ascertained as soon as possible and those works which can be started this year can commence at the earliest. iii) The Superintendent of women jails/wards in the State can also examine specific issues dealing with hygiene, sanitation and medical checkup of women and also the facility required for children and communicate the same as soon as possible to the Headquarter for doing the needful.’
28. At this stage, the Court would indicate that the State does not appear serious in taking immediate remedial measures in the matter inasmuch as it has left it to the Prison Superintendents to prepare/obtain hereinafter referred to as ‘JPHCL’ 1052 estimates for the works recommended with the aid of JPHCL. The Prison Superintendent, being the junior-most officer in the hierarchy, cannot be expected to have much of a say, real or persuasive, to get things done at the higher/highest level. With this in mind, this Court had earlier indicated that the Chief Secretaries of the States/ Union Territories would be filing affidavits, with the idea so that all the recommendations could be scrutinised at the highest level, and consequently, whatever action would be required, could be taken by the State Government, eliminating any processual delays.
29. The State shall act in terms of the directions sought by the AC, being mindful of what we have penned above. (F) STATE OF ODISHA
30. The AC’s Note indicates that the affidavit filed by the Chief Secretary is not clear on one aspect – the Chief Secretary has forwarded minutes of meetings of the Committees of 13 Districts, whereas there are 30 Districts in the State of Odisha. It is not clear if the remaining Districts (17) have held their meetings, and if yes, what report/recommendation(s) have been made. To address the problem of overcrowding in 8 jails, inter alia, additional wards have been constructed in 29 selected jails enhancing the total capacity of inmates by 2240 during the years 2020-2021, 2021- 2022 and 2022-2023. It is stated that additional wards are also under construction in 23 jails, which would enhance the inmate capacity by 1625.
31. For five districts, namely, Nabarangpur, Kandhamal Phulbani, Doegarh, Gajapati and Sundergarh, for which recommendations have been made by the Committee concerned, there is nothing to indicate as to what action has been taken on the same.
32. The State is directed to proceed with all possible expedition to ramp up the capacity and file a fresh affidavit before the next date. (G) STATE OF KERALA
33. The affidavit by the Chief Secretary indicates overcrowding issues in 13 prisons.4 Recommendations have also been made by the For reference, the State of Kerala has 56 prisons. [2024] 5 S.C.R. In Re-Inhuman Conditions In 1382 Prisons Committees. Yet, nothing concrete is forthcoming as to what follow- up action, if any, has been taken by the State Government. As such, the AC has prayed for issuance of these directions: ‘a) In some of the Districts in the State of Kerala, the 1st meeting was adjourned awaiting reports from the Superintendent of Prisons. It is therefore, humbly prayed that in such cases, a 2nd meeting may be held and recommendations to improve the conditions in the prison may be made. b) The State of Kerala may be directed to examine the recommendations made by the Committees in all the districts and take appropriate decisions prioritizing the cases which are urgent and which need immediate action and compliance affidavits may be filed before the next date of hearing.’
34. The State is directed to act in terms of the AC’s prayers extracted above and file a compliance affidavit before the next date. (III) WAY FORWARD
35. Upon careful consideration of the stands taken by the States supra as also the oral submissions of various other States made through their respective learned counsel, we are constrained to observe that the State Governments/Union Territory Administrations have not fully woken up to the dire situation. Bereft of a sense of urgency, we sense a certain lethargy. It is most unfortunate that upon queries put by the Court to the learned counsel appearing for the States, the standard response received is that further time be given to come up with details. Obviously, learned counsel cannot address the Court without instructions.
36. There has been a detailed dialogue between the Court, the AC and the learned counsel, during the hearing. Many aspects and factors have been clarified to learned counsel appearing for the parties. We presume that learned counsel, having taken note of the same, would impress upon their respective clients i.e. the respective States or Union Territories (hereinafter referred to as ‘UT’) to act with diligence. Ex consequenti, we direct that appropriate response(s) shall be filed by way of additional affidavits personally affirmed by the Chief Secretary 1054 of the State/UT concerned, at least a week before the next date of hearing, of course, with advance copies to the AC.
37. In addition to specific directions issued to certain States, it is categorically indicated that pending approval(s), be it for sanction of projects or identification of suitable land, the same be proceeded with and brought to their logical conclusion by the States/UTs within a period of ten weeks, reckoned from today.
38. Few learned counsel have requested that the Court may specify some common/ uniform parameters for States/UTs to create facilities in prisons. This suggestion is merited. To begin with, specifications/ parameters for jails may be in terms prescribed by and under the Model Prison Manual 2016 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘MPM’) issued by the Government of India, Ministry of Home Affairs.
39. Learned Senior counsel for the State of Uttar Pradesh has submitted that as per the parameters in its latest Jail Manual,5 the average area per prisoner is more than what is provided for in the MPM. It is canvassed that if the MPM specification is applied, then the capacity of prisons in Uttar Pradesh would increase substantially, with the current infrastructure alone.
40. We may note that perhaps mere existence of a large campus area would not per se mean that the capacity has been enhanced or augmented. What is required to be seen is that whether the requisite facilities for each individual prisoner are adequate in terms of sleeping area, mobility within the prison, kitchen/food, health facilities, other matters etc.
41. Thus, States/UTs, in their proposed affidavits, should address all issues holistically, including inmate-capacity enhancement/ augmentation. Other logistics such as creation of posts of wardens/ cooks/doctors/various jail staff etc. should also be factored in.
42. Before concluding, we may reiterate that prisoners are covered under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. In Sunil Batra (II) v Delhi Administration,6 this Court had pointedly answered that prisoners are persons who are entitled to Fundamental Rights even while in We take it that the reference is to the Uttar Pradesh Jail Manual, 2022. [1980] 2 SCR 557 : (1980) 3 SCC 488 [2024] 5 S.C.R. In Re-Inhuman Conditions In 1382 Prisons custody. Rama Murthy v State of Karnataka,7 was a case where this Court had identified some problems plaguing jails in India, some of which continue to linger till today. Even before these cases, the view of this Court in respect of prisoners and undertrials was exposited in State of Maharashtra v Prabhakar Pandurang Sangzgiri 8 and Mohan Patnaik v State of Andhra Pradesh.9 These are merely illustrative but sufficient to demonstrate the intent of this Court to secure basic facilities for those housed in prisons and were noticed in Orders/Judgment passed in this writ petition reported as (2016) 3 SCC 700,10 (2016) 10 SCC 17,11 (2017) 10 SCC 658,12 and (2018) 18 SCC 777.13 We expect all stakeholders to rise to the occasion and discharge the obligation cast on them as expeditiously as is possible.
43. The matter be next listed on 11th July, 2024 at the top of the Board. Result of the case: Directions issued. †Headnotes prepared by: Divya Pandey (1997) 3 SCC 642 [1966] 1 SCR 702 : AIR 1966 SC 424 [1975] 2 SCR 24 : (1975) 3 SCC 185 Order dated 05.02.2016. Order dated 03.10.2016. Judgment dated 15.09.2017. Order dated 25.09.2018.