Abstract

All the people are born free and equal in dignity and rights. This guiding principle of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, 1948 lives strong in the hearts and minds of millions of people. Human rights, being the birth right, are, therefore, inherent in all the individual as they are consonant with their freedom and dignity and are conductive to physical, moral, social and spiritual welfare. Therefore, human rights do not mean merely the right to live with humanity but mean the right to live with dignity. The fundamental object of criminal justice system is to provide protection to the innocent and to punish the offenders. Every society has a judicial system for the protection of its law abiding members; it has to make provisions of prisons for the lawbreakers. However, it does not mean that the prisoners have no rights. Except right to movement, right to form an association, right to carry on any trade or business, occupation, prisoners are equally entitled to enjoy many constitutional and human rights like any other ordinary man. As per the Constitutional mandates, every country’s judiciary has a great responsibility to protect the human rights of their citizens. Though judicial interpretation that has in the Indian context, progressively expanded the human rights content of the law and the Supreme Court, in the recent past, has been very vigilant against violations of the human rights of the prisoners. But, in many cases still prisoners are denied the very rights that are fundamental to their being a human being. With this view, the author attempted to analyze the judicial response in standardizing the norms to mitigate the hardship caused to prisoner in the given circumstances.

• 1.   Available at, https://www.brainyquote.com/ quotes/martin_luther_king_jr_122559, visited on 18.04.2022.
• 2.   http://www.legalserviceindia.com/legal/article-75-rights-of-prisoners.html visited on 13.05.2022.
• 3.   J.S.Patil (ed.), Spirit of Human Rights: A Mannual (National Human Rights Commission, New Delhi, 2005) p.2.
• 4.   Available at, http://www.legalserviceindia. com/legal/article-75-rights-of-prisoners.html, visited on 11.06.2022.
• 5.   A.K.Gopalan vs. State of Madras, AIR 1950 SC 27.
• 6.   Maneka Gandhi vs. Union of India, AIR 1978, SC 597.
• 7.   Sunil Batra vs. Delhi Administration, AIR 1978SC 1675: 1978(4) SCC 494.
• 8.   M.H. Hoskot vs. State of Maharashtra, AIR 1978, SC 1548.
• 9.   Hussainara Khatoon vs. State of Bihar, AIR 1979 SC1360: (1980) 1SCC 81.
• 10.   AIR 1980 SC 1535 @ p. 1541: 1980 (3) SCC 526.
• 11.   AIR 1978 SC 1675: 1978 (4) SCC 494.
• 12.   1990 (2) JT (SC) 372: 1990 (3) SCC 119.
• 13.   AIR 1991 SC 2176: 1991 (4) SCC 406.
• 14.   Ibid.
• 15.   AIR 1981 SC 939: 1981 Cri. L.J. 481.
• 16.   AIR 1998 SC 1729: 1988 (4) SCC 36.
• 17.   1994 (3) SCC 569: 1994 Cri.L.J.3139 (1994) 2JT (SC) 423.
• 18.   (1999)1 Crimes 284 @ p.235, 285 (Kart).
• 19.   2000 Cri.L.J. 4058 (AP) (DB).
• 20.   A.R. Antulay vs. R.S. Nayak, (1992) 1 SCC 225.
• 21.   D.K. Basu vs. State of West Bengal, AIR 1997 SC 619.
• 22.   AIR 1981 SC 746.
• 23.   AIR 1983 SC 378.
• 24.   WP (MD) No. 12488 of 2019.
• 25.   Justice K.S. Puttaswamy (Rtd.) & Anr. vs. Union of India & Ors., WP (CIVIL) No. 494 of 2012.
• 26.   2019 SCC Online Bom. 1856.
• 27.   W.P.No.19370 of 1999 (2003)
• 28.   http://www.legalserviceindia.com/legal/article-3339-major-2019-judgments-on-the-rightsof-prisoners.html visited on 27.04.2022.

Data Sharing Statement

Funding