The Committees on Prison Reform

Learn the Mulla list. MU's question is usually answered adequately by the Mulla recommendations plus two other committees, and it is the one to give at length.

The Justice V.R. Krishna Iyer Committee, 1987. On WOMEN PRISONERS. It recommended the induction of more women into the police and the prison service; separate institutions for women with women staff; provision for the children of women prisoners, including their care, education and separation from the prison environment; and attention to the particular health needs of women in custody.

The Model Prison Manual 2003 and 2016. The 2003 Manual, prepared by the Bureau of Police Research and Development, and the revised MODEL PRISON MANUAL 2016, which is the current administrative code and which covers admission, classification, health, education, vocational training, legal aid, the treatment of women and of undertrials, prison computerisation, and after-care.

The Justice Amitava Roy Committee, 2018. Appointed BY THE SUPREME COURT in a suo motu proceeding on the inhuman conditions in prisons, and reporting on overcrowding, the shortage of staff, the availability of legal aid, the use of under-trial review committees and special courts, and the health of prisoners.

And the National Human Rights Commission, whose section 12(c) power to VISIT any jail or institution where persons are detained, and whose recommendations on custodial deaths and on the reporting of them within twenty-four hours, are a continuing source of prison policy. That is [The Human Rights Commissions].

The four recommendations that recur

One, that the object is reformation. Said in 1920, in 1952, in 1983 and in 2023, and never written into a statute until the Model Act.

Two, that the undertrial should not be there. Mulla in 1983, the Supreme Court in Hussainara Khatoon in 1979, section 436A of the criminal procedure law inserted in 2005 and now section 479 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, which requires the release of an undertrial who has been detained for half of the maximum sentence, and the under-trial review committees. The problem is procedural and the prison inherits it.

Three, that the staff must be a trained profession. Reckless, Mulla, and the Model Manuals. Convict officers under section 23 of the Act of 1894 exist because the cadre does not.

Four, that the manual must be rewritten and the Act replaced. The Model Manuals of 1960, 2003 and 2016 did the first; the Model Prisons and Correctional Services Act 2023 attempts the second.

And the fifth, which is the reason nothing moves. Prisons are a STATE subject, so every recommendation is addressed to twenty-eight States and eight Union Territories, and the Union can only model, fund and persuade.

The Model Prisons and Correctional Services Act 2023

Its place. A model law circulated by the Union Ministry of Home Affairs in 2023 to replace the Prisons Act 1894, the Prisoners Act 1900 and the Transfer of Prisoners Act 1950.

What it puts into statutory form. Security assessment and segregation; INDIVIDUAL SENTENCE PLANNING; a grievance redressal mechanism inside the prison; the use of technology, including video conferencing with courts; PAROLE, FURLOUGH and PREMATURE RELEASE; provisions for WOMEN and TRANSGENDER prisoners; legal aid within the prison; vocational training and skill development; and after-care and rehabilitation.

Why that matters. Because everything in the list has been recommended since 1920 and has lived in manuals, which are executive instructions a Superintendent may depart from. A statute makes it a duty.

And the qualification. It is a MODEL. Its effect depends on each State enacting or adopting it, and the record of the Model Manuals of 1960, 2003 and 2016 is not encouraging.

Suggestive measures, which MU asks for

Reduce the population before improving the building. Bail reform, the release of an undertrial who has completed half the maximum sentence, functioning under-trial review committees, and plea bargaining for the offences for which it is available, which is [Plea Bargaining].

Put legal aid inside the prison. A duty counsel present in every prison, with the Legal Services Authorities' jail visiting scheme actually staffed, which is [Legal Aid].

Make video conferencing the default for procedural hearings, which removes the escort problem that keeps undertrials in custody on remand dates.

Create the cadre. Correctional officers, psychologists, teachers and medical staff as a recruited service with a training institution, and the abolition of convict officers.

Open the institution. Controlled access for the press, for the Commissions under sections 12(c) and 13(1)(i) of their Acts, and for the boards of visitors, because a closed institution is where the abuses are.

Legislate rather than circulate. Each State to enact the Model Act of 2023 rather than adopt it administratively, so that sentence planning, grievance redressal and after-care become duties.

And measure. Publish occupancy, undertrial proportion, custodial deaths, staff vacancies and the number of prisoners released under the half-sentence provision, by prison, annually. A reform that is not measured is a manual.

A worked example

MU sets: "Write critically on the history of prison establishments in India and the recommendations forwarded by various committees or commissions towards prison reforms. Provide suggestive measures for seeking futuristic prison reforms in India." Twenty marks.

Part one, the history. The Prisons Act 1894 and its object of safe custody and discipline; the design features, convict officers, labour, private maintenance, whipping and irons; and the fact that prisons are entry 4 of the State List. That is the previous chapter.

Part two, the committees, in order with dates. Indian Jails Committee 1919 to 1920, reformation as the object; Reckless 1951 to 1952, reformative centres and a professional cadre; the All India Jail Manual Committee 1957 to 1959 and the Model Prison Manual 1960; the Working Group 1972 to 1973, the prison as part of the criminal justice system; MULLA 1980 to 1983, with six of its recommendations; KRISHNA IYER 1987 on women prisoners; the Model Prison Manuals of 2003 and 2016; the Amitava Roy Committee 2018 appointed by the Supreme Court; and the Model Prisons and Correctional Services Act 2023.

Part three, the critical half. That the same four recommendations recur for a century; that they live in manuals rather than in statutes; that prisons being a State subject makes every recommendation an appeal; and that the real determinants, overcrowding and the proportion of undertrials, are problems of criminal procedure and of budget rather than of prison law.

Part four, the suggestions. The seven above, in order of what changes the number of people in the building first.

And close on the measure. That a prison reform is to be judged by the occupancy rate, the proportion of undertrials and the number of custodial deaths, and that a report which does not change those three has changed nothing.

What this does NOT mean

It does not mean nothing was implemented. Whipping went in 1955, the manuals were revised three times, juveniles were separated by the juvenile justice legislation, and section 436A and its successor release long-held undertrials.

It does not mean the committees were wrong. They have been consistently right and consistently unimplemented, which is a different criticism.

It does not mean the Union is powerless. It funds prison modernisation, prepares the model manuals and the model Act, and the National Human Rights Commission inspects.

And it does not mean prison reform is only about buildings. The population, the procedure and the staff decide the conditions, and the building is the last of the four.

Quick revision

INDIAN JAILS COMMITTEE 1919-20, Cardew: REFORMATION AND REHABILITATION as the object; separation of juveniles; classification; staff training; a uniform manual. RECKLESS 1951-52: jails as reformative centres, revision of manuals, a professional cadre, probation, parole and after-care. ALL INDIA JAIL MANUAL COMMITTEE 1957-59: the MODEL PRISON MANUAL 1960. WORKING GROUP 1972-73: a national policy, and the prison as part of the CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM.

MULLA COMMITTEE 1980-83, the fullest report: a national policy on prisons; REPLACEMENT of the Prisons Act 1894; a NATIONAL PRISON COMMISSION; segregation of UNDERTRIALS and reduction of their number by speedy trial; prisons as CORRECTIONAL institutions; a professional, adequately paid cadre with training institutions; after-care, probation and parole; abolition of classification by class and ability to pay; discouragement of lodging in police lock-ups; and controlled access for the press and public.

KRISHNA IYER 1987 on WOMEN PRISONERS: more women in the police and prison service, separate institutions with women staff, provision for the children of women prisoners, and women's health in custody. MODEL PRISON MANUALS 2003 and 2016. AMITAVA ROY COMMITTEE 2018, appointed by the SUPREME COURT, on overcrowding, staff, legal aid, under-trial review committees and health. MODEL PRISONS AND CORRECTIONAL SERVICES ACT 2023, replacing the Acts of 1894, 1900 and 1950, with sentence planning, grievance redressal, technology, parole, furlough and premature release, women and transgender prisoners, legal aid, vocational training and after-care.

Four recurring recommendations: reformation as the object; the undertrial should not be there; a trained professional staff; and a rewritten manual and a replaced Act. The fifth reason nothing moves: prisons are entry 4 of the STATE LIST.

Test yourself

1. Which committee first stated reformation as the object of the prison, and when? The Indian Jails Committee of 1919 to 1920, chaired by Sir Alexander Cardew, which also recommended the separation of juveniles, the classification of prisoners, the training of staff, the abolition of the worst physical punishments and a uniform prison manual.

2. Give six recommendations of the Mulla Committee. A national policy on prisons; the replacement of the Prisons Act 1894 by a comprehensive new law; a National Prison Commission as a continuing body; the segregation of undertrials from convicts and the reduction of their number by speedy trial; the treatment of prisons as correctional institutions with education, training and work; and the creation of a professional, adequately paid prison cadre with training institutions. Others are after-care, probation and parole, the abolition of classification by class and ability to pay, and controlled access for the press and public.

3. What did the Krishna Iyer Committee of 1987 address? Women prisoners. It recommended the induction of more women into the police and the prison service, separate institutions for women staffed by women, provision for the children of women prisoners including their care, education and separation from the prison environment, and attention to the particular health needs of women in custody.

4. Why do the same recommendations recur for a century? Because they have lived in manuals and reports rather than in statutes, so they bind nobody; because prisons are a State subject under entry 4 of the State List, so every recommendation is addressed to the States and the Union can only model, fund and persuade; and because the determinants of prison conditions, overcrowding and the proportion of undertrials, are problems of criminal procedure and budget rather than of prison administration.

5. Give four suggestive measures for future reform. Reduce the population before improving the building, through bail reform, the statutory release of undertrials who have served half the maximum sentence, functioning under-trial review committees and plea bargaining; put a duty counsel inside every prison under the legal services machinery; make video conferencing the default for procedural hearings; and create a recruited correctional cadre with psychologists, teachers and medical staff, abolishing convict officers. A fifth is to publish occupancy, undertrial proportion, custodial deaths and staff vacancies prison by prison, because a reform that is not measured is a manual.