The Supreme Court recently expressed serious concern over the surging number of those incarcerated in prisons across the country, while pointing out that overcrowding of jails has gone up despite a slew of directions issued to check it and the assurances given by the government in the matter. Quoting the NCRB’s Prison Statistics India – 2014, the apex court said there was no noticeable change in the condition of prisoners and in fact, the problem of overcrowding has perhaps been accentuated with the passage of time. “It is clear that inspite of several orders passed by this court from time to time in various petitions, for one reason or another, the issue of overcrowding in jails continues to persist,” a bench of Justices M.B. Lokur and R.K. Agrawal said, and further observed that prisoners deserve to be treated with dignity.
The Prison statistics available as on December 31, 2014 from the website of the National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB) indicate that the 1,387 jails in India are already overcrowded with 4,18,536 persons imprisoned against a sanctioned capacity of 3,56,561 inmates. There are 1,84,386 inmates lodged in Central Prisons alone, against the authorized capacity of 1,52,312 inmates, showing an occupancy rate of 121.1 per cent. The highest number of 88,221 inmates were reported from Uttar Pradesh followed by Madhya Pradesh 36,433, Bihar 31,295, Maharashtra 27,868 and Punjab 26,007 at the end of the year 2014.
Besides, of the total prison population of 4,18,536 inmates, around 2,82,879 (67.6 per cent) are under-trial prisoners, many of whom have been booked for petty offences. According to the NCRB data, the number of undertrial prisoners increased by 1.6 per cent in 2014 (2,82,879) over 2013 (2,78,503). Out of the 2,82,879 undertrial inmates, 82,735 are illiterates, 1,19,370 are educated upto Class X, 55,605 are having education of above Class X and below graduation, 17000 are graduates and 5,202 are post graduates. “Prison reforms, thus need to be accelerated for creating congenial and reformative environment for inmates” says Director General of the NCRB, Archana Ramasundaram.
The NCRB Report, however, indicate that the highest percentage (27.3 per cent) (63,225 out of 2,31,962) of the undertrials under IPC crimes are charged with murder. The number of undertrial prisoners facing murder charge increased by 5.2 per cent in 2014 (63,225) over 2013 (60,110). Theft and attempt to murder also are two IPC crimes under which there are a large number of undertrial prisoners. Number of undertrial prisoners facing attempt to murder charge increased by 1.1. per cent in 2014 (23,955) over 2013 (23,688).
Concerned with the violation of undertrials’ right to speedy trial, the Supreme Court, in the last over a decade, has been insisting, time and again, that the governments – central as well as state – take effective measures to speed up trials in cases relating to petty offences. The Court has been expressing grave concern and stressing the need for urgently disposing of cases relating to petty offences in which undertrials are languishing in jails for want of sureties. These detenus are mostly the poorest of the poor, who continue to be in unnecessary detention only because of their poverty-induced failure to raise bail.
The Supreme Court’s reluctance to keep more and more undertrials in jails represents a ray of hope for nearly 2 lakh prison inmates awaiting trial in various courts. The Court said that it was for the States and Union Territories to come forward and say that in cases of petty offences, the police would file chargesheet within one month to show their bonafides. The Court also warned that if a first time offender is allowed to remain in jail for a long period, he may become a hardcore criminal.
The Supreme Court has clarified the legal position about the law of arrest (Criminal Procedure Law) on several occasions in the past. The SC says, “An arrest during the investigation of a cognizable case may be considered justified in one or other of the following circumstances:”
1. The case involves a grave offence like murder, dacoity, robbery, rape, terrorism, etc., and it is necessary to arrest the accused and bring his movements under restrain to infuse confidence among fear-stricken victims. 2. The accused is likely to abscond and evade the processes of law. 3. The accused is given to violent behavior and is likely to commit further offences unless his movements are brought under restrain. 4. The accused is a habitual offender and unless kept in custody, he is likely to commit similar offences again.
While the Supreme Court’s latest firm stand that all accused, except those charged with heinous crimes, should be granted bail to help de-congest jail, this stand, equally significantly, has turned out to be a push for the revival of the old liberal judicial approach where the accused, in keeping with the doctrine of the presumption on innocence, were released on bail. After the practice was abandoned, its departure not only meant overcrowding in already congested jails, but also resulted in accused spending more time in Jail than they would have if convicted.
It is in this circumstances that the Parliament had passed a bill in December 2008, radically revamping the Criminal Procedure Code, and curtailing the usual arrest powers of the police in cases where the maximum possible sentence is seven years or less. Unfortunately, the Cr PC Amendment Bill has since been kept in abeyance after it was sent for Presidential assent, due to objections raised in certain quarters, particularly by some bar associations in the country.
As for the common man, the sooner the Cr PC Amendment Bill is passed into law, the better it would be!
(The writer is a freelance journalist)
