Rules promoting caste bias in jails struck down by Supreme Court

“Discriminatory laws enacted before the Constitution of India came into force need to be scrutinised and done away with,” it said

The Supreme Court on Thursday brought an end to the longstanding practice of caste-based discrimination in prisons, declaring provisions in various jail manuals “unconstitutional” for violating the inmates’ right to dignity, equality and non-discrimination, and calling for immediate reforms across all states and Union territories.

The court issued a series of directives to the Centre and states to ensure that no inmate is subjected to work assignments or housing arrangements based on their caste, and ordered that the caste column in registers of undertrial and convicted prisoners be deleted. (HT Archive)

The verdict, delivered by Chief Justice of India (CJI) Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, specifically addressed the entrenched discriminatory practices against marginalised communities, including scheduled castes (SC), scheduled tribes (ST) and denotified tribes (DNTs) in India’s prisons.

“The right to live with dignity extends even to the incarcerated. Not providing dignity to prisoners is a relic of the colonisers and pre-colonial mechanisms, where oppressive systems were designed to dehumanise and degrade those under the control of the State,” the bench said.

The court issued a series of directives to the Centre and states to ensure that no inmate is subjected to work assignments or housing arrangements based on their caste, and ordered that the caste column in registers of undertrial and convicted prisoners be deleted.

“Discriminatory laws enacted before the Constitution of India came into force need to be scrutinised and done away with,” it said.

The bench, also comprising justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra, held that caste-based assignments of labour, such as assigning menial tasks including cleaning and sweeping to marginalised castes while reserving cooking for higher castes, is a violation of Articles 14 15 of the Constitution, which ensures equality and prohibits discrimination on the grounds of caste. It further stated that these practices fail to meet the test of intelligible differentia and do not contribute to the reformation and rehabilitation of prisoners.

“Similarly, the reference to ‘scavenger class’ is a practice of the caste system and untouchability. No social group is born as a ‘scavenger class’. They are forced to undertake certain jobs that are considered ‘menial’ and polluting based on the notions of birth-based purity and pollution. The provision that food shall be cooked by ‘suitable caste’ reflects notions of untouchability, where certain castes are considered suitable for cooking or handling kitchen work, while others are not. Besides, the division of work on the basis of caste is a practice of untouchability prohibited under the Constitution in Article 17,” the court said.

Striking down as unconstitutional the provisions in state prison manuals that discriminate based on caste, the court directed all states and Union territories to revise their prison manuals and rules within three months to align with this judgment. The Union government is required to update the Model Prison Manual 2016 and the Model Prisons and Correctional Services Act 2023 within three months to remove discriminatory provisions. The impugned prison manuals related to several states, including West Bengal, Uttar Pradesh, Kerala, Madhya Pradesh, Odisha, Andhra Pradesh, Tamil Nadu, Karnataka, Rajasthan, Maharashtra and Himachal Pradesh.

To combat caste-based prejudices, the bench called for strict adherence to guidelines laid down in Arnesh Kumar Vs State of Bihar (2014) and Amanatullah Khan Vs Commissioner of Police, Delhi (2024) cases to prevent arbitrary arrests of denotified tribe members. The guidelines require police officers to ensure procedural safeguards, particularly for vulnerable communities, reinforcing the broader fight against systemic biases.

The bench further registered proceedings on its own motion (suo motu) to address caste and other forms of discrimination within prisons, directing that a new case be registered as “In Re: Discrimination Inside Prisons in India.” The court will review compliance reports from all states and the Union government in this case, ensuring sustained oversight.

The court’s verdict came on a petition moved by journalist Sukanya Shantha who wrote an article on the persistence of discriminatory rules in prison manuals that reinforce caste hierarchies, and urged the court to issue clear directions to ensure that all prison manuals and practices are overhauled.

Commending the petitioner for moving a well-drafted and meaningful plea, the 148-page judgment held that such discriminatory practices in prisons violate the principles of equality enshrined in the Constitution and demanded that prison authorities bring their regulations in line with constitutional mandates.

“Caste can be an intelligible principle of classification as it has been used to create protective policies for the marginalised castes. Furthermore, the Constitution provides for the enumeration of certain castes and tribes as SCs and STs in order to facilitate protective discrimination and overall promote equitable distribution of resources. However, as evident from the language of Article 15(1), caste cannot be a ground to discriminate against members of marginalised castes,” noted the bench.

To differentiate between inmates on the basis of “habit”, “custom”, “superior mode of living”, and “natural tendency to escape”, etc is unconstitutionally vague and indeterminate, held the court, adding the classification on obsolete understanding of caste, based on pre-constitutional legislations and practices, lacks a rational nexus.

The Supreme Court found that provisions in the prison manuals which assigned specific labour roles to certain castes amounted to both direct and indirect discrimination under Article 15. The use of terms like “menial jobs” and the reference to certain communities being “accustomed” to perform such duties was identified as a veiled continuation of caste biases.

“These provisions disproportionately harm marginalised castes, perpetuate caste-based labour divisions and reinforce social hierarchies. The manuals/rules are based on and reinforce stereotypes against the marginalised castes,” said the judgment, adding this form of discrimination was further highlighted by the manual’s treatment of DNTs, reinforcing negative stereotypes against these communities.

The top court also condemned practices where marginalised prisoners were forced to clean sewers and tanks in hazardous conditions, calling it a clear violation of human dignity.

The Supreme Court expanded the scope of Article 21, stating that caste-based discrimination hinders personal growth and development. It ruled that prison systems must allow individuals from marginalised communities to overcome caste prejudices, providing an environment that respects equality and dignity.

The court further held that the selective assignment of menial jobs to specific castes amounted to forced labour under Article 23, adding that the exploitation of marginalised communities by compelling them to perform undesirable tasks perpetuates historical injustices and is a clear violation of their constitutional rights.

Berating the classification of habitual offenders, particularly DNTs as members of criminal groups, the court declared such classifications unconstitutional and ordered all states to review such references.

“Members of denotified tribes have historically been treated as criminals from birth. This classification is an affront to their dignity and a gross violation of Article 21, which guarantees the right to life with dignity,” it stated.

The judgment also took aim at the Model Prison Manual of 2016, identifying several gaps in addressing caste-based discrimination. While the manual prohibits some forms of discrimination, the court noted that it failed to fully eliminate caste-based segregation and labour division in prisons. It also criticised the manual for not incorporating the 2013 law that bans manual scavenging, urging comprehensive reform.

“We clarify that the Prohibition of Employment as Manual Scavengers and their Rehabilitation Act has a binding effect even on prisons. In relation to toilets, manual scavenging or hazardous cleaning of a sewer or a septic tank inside a prison shall not be permitted,” it declared