By Vineet Malik | April 2, 2025 | India
Prison reforms in India looks only good inside detailed reports, recommendations, dusty files, misleading court undertakings amid gross violations of prisoners human rights
With one more judgment ruled by the Bombay High Court (HC) last Saturday, the callous and most neglected issue of overcrowding of inmates in Mumbai Central Prison also known as Arthur Road Prison has once again emerged with no hope for more than 2800 inmates.
Recent Observation made by The Bombay HC
Justice Milind Jadhav granted bail to an auto driver – Mangesh Gaikwad, on a premise of overcrowded prisons and prolonged imprisonment without commencement of trial.
The accused was put behind bars for alleged murder in 2021.
The judgment says “Bail is the rule and refusal is the exception”, highlighting the importance of indefinite delays without trial undermining personal liberty. Prison cells with 50 inmates capacity are now housing 250.
History of Arthur Road Prison
Arthur Road Prison was established in 1925.
This is not the first instance when the Bombay HC has granted bail on the premise of overcrowded prisons.
In February this year, in a similar situation, the Bombay HC granted bail to the accused due to overcrowded prisons. It was then revealed that 3000 inmates lived in severe suffocation against the capacity of 804 in Arthur Road prison.
This prison is known for its administrative lapses by the Maharashtra State government.
Observations made by The National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) on Arthur Road Prison in 2017
A member of the NHRC, S.C Sinha’s visit to the Arthur Road Prison to inspect the infrastructural facilities, living condition of prison inmates and the functioning of prison administration on 25 – 26 May 2017 made shocking revelations.
A final report was released in 2018, highlighting grave systemic lapses.
The Prison was found grossly overcrowded. 2801 inmates were languishing as against its actual capacity for 804.
The most elementary rights of the prisoners, the minimum need of living space, clean and hygienic living conditions and proper bedding were found adversely affected.
Some prisoners complained about failure of the Court administration pertaining to complying with the trial of their cases. The prison authorities justified the lapse citing ‘lack of police escorts’.
Accommodation for inmates was severely insufficient. All the 15 prison cells were found overcrowded with inmates huddling for space.
Inmates complained lack of space for them to sleep. They were exposed to rainwater that came through the iron bars. These conditions were found completely unsatisfactory. Inmates slept in three rows, two rows towards the walls of the prison cell and one row in the middle. It was not possible for them to turn right or left that forced them to stick to their initial position.
All the prison cells were 92 years old. Considering several pros and cons, it was concluded that the building repair work would be risky, tiresome, difficult and expensive. The prison cells were found to be outdated, unsafe and could lead to total collapse anytime.
It was an alarming situation that violated the right to speedy trial due to the shortage of police escort.
Toilets constructed outside the prison cells lacked water facility.
There was no Reverse Osmosis (RO) drinking water for inmates.
Rules for Treatment of Prisoners
The Constitution of India, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the Standard Minimum Rules for Treatment of Prisoners clearly specify the Standards of Treatment with the Prisoners in Prisons.
Every inmate is entitled to all human rights within the limitation of imprisonment.
The Supreme Court in 1996 in the matter of Ramamurthy vs. State of Karnataka expressed urgent need to bring about nation wise uniformity of prison laws and prepare a draft model prison manual.
A committee was set up in the Bureau of Police Research and Development (BPR&D). The prison manual drafted by the committee was accepted by the Central government and circulated to State governments in December 2003.
As a matter of fact, overcrowding among other issues in prisons still remains one of the worst living conditions not only in Arthur Road prison but also in several other State prisons in India despite directions given by the Supreme Court.
Ministry of Home Affairs Role is Done and Dusted
The Ministry of Home Affairs website is updated with several links on prison reforms.
Every time, the Ministry is summoned by the Supreme Court in one prison lapse case or another , it comes up with an explanation to have already prepared the Model Prison Manual for the Superintendence and Management of Prisons in India, 2003.
It is inferred that the causes of overcrowding in prisons has been due to inadequate infrastructure, lengthy period of pre-trial detention and strict sentencing practices without the provision of fine and community service.
In the recent past, the Ministry of Home Affairs to escape from its accountability had put the onus on politicians and State governments to address the issue of overcrowding in prisons.
It is apparent that the States have failed to comply with the directions of the Constitutional Courts in India that has led to gross human rights violations of prisoners.
It is time for the Supreme Court to deal with this dismal situation with an ‘iron hand’ and forthwith initiate suo-moto contempt proceedings against the erring States and government officials to bring this matter to a logical conclusion. Any leniency shown towards the officials should amount to ‘misplaced sympathy’.
The Revelation has requested the Bombay HC, Ministry of Home Affairs, Arthur Road Prison - Inspector General and Superintendent, NHRC and BPR&D for their comments to be submitted latest by the closing hours of 3 April.
Observations made by the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) on Arthur Road Prison in 2017 can be read here.
Comments