Court Rebukes Caste-Based Discrimination in Prisons

jail prison
Image Credits- Ye_Jinghan, Unsplash

In a landmark decision, the Supreme Court has directed all states and union territories to immediately amend prison rules to stop caste-based discrimination and segregation of labor in prisons. The court stated that this is a violation of Article 15 of the Constitution. It noted that dividing tasks such as cooking and cleaning based on caste is inappropriate. A three-judge bench of the Supreme Court highlighted that prison regulations discriminate in the allocation of work based on caste. Assigning cooking duties to inmates of higher castes and cleaning duties to those of lower castes is a violation of constitutional provisions, fostering caste-based discrimination within prisons.

The court emphasized that the segregation of work based on caste reflects a colonial mindset that cannot continue in independent India. The Supreme Court declared caste-based discrimination in prison work as unconstitutional. This judgment overturned the decision of the Madras High Court, which allowed the practice of separating inmates based on caste. The decision came during the hearing of a public interest litigation (PIL) filed by journalist Sukanya Shanta, who highlighted caste-based discrimination in prisons across 17 states. The case of *C. Arul vs. Secretary to the Government (2014)* was central to this, where the plea sought to stop caste-based discrimination in prisons and release inmates from Palayamkottai Prison. However, the High Court had previously refused to consider the petition.

In delivering its verdict in the C. Arul case, the court took into account the state’s argument that prisoners are segregated by caste to prevent communal conflicts in districts like Tirunelveli and Tuticorin. The Supreme Court, led by Chief Justice Dr. D.Y. Chandrachud, with Justices J.B. Pardiwala and Manoj Mishra, rejected this justification, stating that it is the state’s responsibility to maintain discipline and order in prison without resorting to extreme measures like caste-based segregation.

The court referenced two key rules from the Rajasthan Jail Manual, Rule 37 and Rule 67, which mention caste-based provisions for prison tasks. Rule 67, for instance, specifies that a cook should belong to a higher caste, like a Brahmin or an upper-caste Hindu. These rules reflect the reality of caste-based division in Indian society, where communities operate along stark caste lines.

The court further observed that caste-based discrimination in prison work cannot be considered “intellectual discrimination” or “reasonable classification.” It directly violates Article 15, which prohibits discrimination based on religion, race, caste, sex, or place of birth, as well as Article 14, which ensures equality before the law.

The concept of “intellectual discrimination” is based on the idea that a specific group of people possesses common characteristics, justifying certain classifications. For instance, the Maternity Benefits Act of 1961 applies only to working women, as they need special protection to care for their expected child, highlighting the logical basis for such laws.

In India, where social divisions are deeply entrenched, laws are crafted with the goal of addressing social inequalities and challenges faced by various communities. Instead of perpetuating these divisions, laws should aim to provide opportunities to those who are marginalized and need extra protection.

The Supreme Court stated that prison rules clearly discriminate, and any mention of caste in the regulations is unconstitutional. The court has instructed all states and union territories to immediately amend their prison manuals to remove such discriminatory provisions. States are also required to submit compliance reports to the court. The bench, comprising Chief Justice D.Y. Chandrachud, Justice J.B. Pardiwala, and Justice Manoj Mishra, made this decision after journalist Sukanya Shanta brought the issue to light. She had argued that caste-based discrimination is prevalent in prisons across 17 states. In December 2023, she filed the PIL in the Supreme Court. The court has now given states three months to comply with its order.

It is notable that the first hearing of the case took place in January 2024, and the Supreme Court had issued notices to 17 states, seeking their responses. Within six months, only Uttar Pradesh, Jharkhand, Odisha, Tamil Nadu, and West Bengal responded to the court. In 2020, Sukanya had published a research report citing examples from three key states, including Rajasthan, where prisoners were assigned tasks based on caste, such as barbers cutting hair, Brahmins cooking, and Valmikis cleaning. The Uttar Pradesh Jail Manual of 1941 also contained provisions reflecting caste biases.


The court took ten months to complete the hearings, with the final hearing held on July 10. During this hearing, the court criticized the provisions in the Uttar Pradesh Jail Manual. After reading out some of the rules, the court rebuked the state government, stating that these rules were deeply painful. The Ministry of Home Affairs had already issued a notice in February, declaring such caste-based discrimination illegal. The court further instructed states and the central government to ensure that their prison rules contain no discriminatory provisions and that prison authorities treat inmates with humanity to avoid fostering bitterness among prisoners.

The Supreme Court has described this caste-based discrimination as a colonial relic that must be immediately eradicated, as every inmate deserves the right to live with dignity.

Vikas Parashram Meshram is a social worker and activist working towards the rights of tribal and marginalized communities.  Email: [email protected]

Support Countercurrents

Countercurrents is answerable only to our readers. Support honest journalism because we have no PLANET B.
Become a Patron at Patreon

Join Our Newsletter

GET COUNTERCURRENTS DAILY NEWSLETTER STRAIGHT TO YOUR INBOX

Join our WhatsApp and Telegram Channels

Get CounterCurrents updates on our WhatsApp and Telegram Channels

Related Posts

Bhakti-Kal and Caste Question

An abridged version of talk delivered on 23rd October, 2024 at Calicut University I say this with emphasis that in Indian history two periods, only two periods, came as a…

Poona Pact and Its Adverse Effects

Caste is considered to be the cornerstone of Indian Hindu society. In this structure of hierarchical inequality, the untouchables are at the lowest level, who were officially called 'Depressed Classes'…

Has the Caste Vanished?

Amid the twin issues of Caste Census and Sub-categorization of reservation of SCs/STs and ‘creamy layer’ among SCs, it must be remembered that caste issues have always been tweaked and…

Join Our Newsletter


Annual Subscription

Join Countercurrents Annual Fund Raising Campaign and help us

Latest News