INTRODUCTION

Prison

populations

have

remained

at

the

margins

of

welfare

and

development, and have seldom been viewed as in need of deserving social

services. With the development of criminology as a subject of enquiry, a
gradual shift has taken place, whereby the individual alone is no more held
responsible for his/her norm or law breaking behaviour. This shift in
perspective has led to the development of an understanding of crime
causation that includes psychological, social, economic and political factors
as being responsible for deviant behaviour in human beings. The shift has
included a gradual policy shift away from capital punishment, torture and
debilitating forms of punishment, imprisonment as and not for punishment,
more humane custodial conditions, protection of legal and human rights, and
finally a focus on retraining, rehabilitation and social inclusion.
The history of the correctional movement could be traced to developments
which first took place in the U.K. in the early twentieth century. The turning
point, in the humane treatment of custodial populations came with the
Universal Declaration of Human Rights. These standards were further
strengthened by the U.N. Standard Minimum Rules for Treatment of
Prisoners, 1955. In the Indian scenario, the Indian Constitution, the Prisons
Act, 1894, the rulings of the Supreme Court and the various High Courts in
the country and the reports of various prison reform committees set up by
the government from time to time have adequately highlighted the problems
and concerns with regard to the situation of prisoners and the suggested
roadmap to address these concerns. In contrast, the situation at the ground
level continues to a cause for concern. It warrants urgent steps to be taken
with regard to deinstitutionalization of prison populations, improving
custodial conditions and taking steps to create human resource and
infrastructure to fulfil the correctional and rehabilitation objectives of Indian
criminal justice system. In this chapter, an attempt is made to provide an

overview of the past and current prison reforms in India and some
suggestions for the improvement of prison conditions in India.

PRISON REFORM: HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE

The history of the correctional movement could be traced to developments
which first took place in the U.K. in the early twentieth century. The
Gladstone Committee Report (1894) was one of the first such attempts to
bring reforms in the British prison system. The Report highlighted the
overemphasis on the deterrent aim of imprisonment and under emphasis on
reformation of the prisoner. It reiterated that the prisoner should not be
merely taken as condemned but the system should be designed so as to be
able to individualise him/her. It condemned hard labour, hard fare and hard
bed as outdated concepts.
The report laid down the basic principles of the existing prison system in
England:
1.

Imprisonment should lead to constructive training moral, mental and

vocational.
2.

Such

training

should

be

lawfully

carried

out

in

homogenous

establishments specifically created for the purpose.

3.

Special training prisons need not provide security of normal prison

buildings.
4.

Services of the community outside prisons should be enlisted to help in

training of the prisoners.

5.

Continuing

responsibility

of

society

should

be

maintained

for

discharged prisoners towards their social rehabilitation (cited in Government

of India, 1987, Vol. II).
In India under the British rule, it was Lord Macaulay, who drew attention to
the terrible prison conditions prevailing in the country. A Committee was set
up in 1836 to examine the issue and make recommendations. However, the
Committee did not give any reform oriented recommendations on the pretext
of laxity of discipline (cited in Government of India, 1987, Vol. II).
The defining moment in the humane treatment of custodial populations
came with the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (United Nations, 1948).
It resolved that member nations shall ensure that citizens are given equal
treatment, and have the right to life and liberty. It further resolved that the
State shall ensure security of persons, freedom from torture, cruel, inhuman
and degrading treatment, rjght to recognition as persons before the law, no
arbitrary arrests, detention or exile, equality before law, fair, public,
independent and impartial trial with necessary guarantees for defense.
These standards were further strengthened by the U.N. Standard Minimum
Rules for Treatment of Prisoners, 1955 (United Nations, 1955). The Standard
Minimum Rules was approved by the Economic and Social Council of the
United Nations in 1957, of which India is a signatory. These rules mandate
that the prisoner should be encouraged and assisted in cultivating relations
with persons or extra-institutional agencies conducive to his rehabilitation
and best interest after release. It stipulates that representatives of such
agencies shall have access to prisoners during their term of incarceration
and be taken into consultation for the future of each prisoner from the
beginning of his sentence. The Fourth United Nations Congress on
Prevention of Crime and Treatment of Offenders, held in Japan, 1970,
devoted a full session to the theme of public participation of prevention and
control of crime and juvenile delinquency.

The U.N. Declaration on Protection from Torture, 1975 (United Nations, 1975)
laid down guidelines for member nations to ensure protection from torture:

Article 2: Any act of torture or other cruel inhuman or degrading

treatment or punishment is an offence to human dignity shall be condemned

as a denial of the purposes of the Charter of the UN and as violation of
human rights and fundamental freedoms proclaimed in the Universal
declaration of Human Rights.

Article 3: No State may permit or tolerate torture or other cruel,

inhuman, degrading treatment or punishment.

A SITUATIONAL ANALYSIS OF PRISON IN INDIA
The system of prison welfare in the country was set in the context of
reformation and rehabilitation of the convicted prisoner. Prisons were
originally meant to house those who had been convicted by the law for the
offences they were charged with. A minor focus of prisons was the housing of
untried or undertrial prisoners, i.e. those awaiting trial and kept in judicial
custody, till the completion of their cases in courts. They were in prison
either because they were unable to produce suitable sureties or because
they had been denied bail due to the nature of the offence they were
charged with. The basic duty of the prison and judicial authorities towards
this population was to ensure their physical and mental health and safety
and access to their legal rights. The question of any correctional or treatment
programs for this group did not arise, as they had not yet been found guilty
of the offence they had been charged with.
However, one fact that the authorities and civil society did not take note of
was the rising numbers of undertrials in prisons. Owing to the rising crime
rate, it is observed that the number of prisoners has expanded since the last
century.

However,

the

number

of

prisons

has

not

increased

post-

independence, thus resulting in overcrowding and non-classification of

prisoners according to correctional principles. According to the National

Crime Records Bureau (2006), there are a total of 1336 prisons in the
country, housing a total population of 373,271 prisoners as against a
stipulated capacity of 263,911 prisoners. Out of this number, as of 2006,
31.3 per cent were convicts, 65.7 per cent were undertrials and the balance
3 per cent being detainees and others. As far as the male-fefhale ratio is
concerned, 96.1 per cent were males and 3.9 per cent were females.
The average occupancy of prisons in the country was 144.1 per cent for
males and 97.5 per cent for females. This implies an overcrowding of 44.1
per cent for males against the stipulated/authorized capacity, while for
female wards/prison are underpopulated to the tune of 2.5 per cent. The
worst scenario in terms of overcrowding of male prisoners was found in
Sikkim and Delhi (222 per cent and 221.1 per cent, i.e. overcrowding of 122
per cent and 121.1 per cent respectively). Among the smaller states, the
most manageable situation was found to be in Nagaland (57.2 per cent, i.e.
underpopulated by 42.8 per cent) and among the larger states, it was
Rajasthan and West Bengal (81.8 per cent and 92.9 per cent).
The delays in trials in courts have also taken menacing dimensions, leading
to the overcrowding of prisons. The Law Commission in its 120th Report
recommended that the strength of judges per million population may be
increased from 10.5 to 50 judges. The present judge strength in India is 14
per million population (Twocircles.net, 2009). India has one of the poorest
judge-population ratios when compared to countries such as Australia (47
per million), UK (50 per million), Canada (75 per million) and USA (107 per
million) (Hansaria, 2005). This is despite the fact that the pendency of cases
in the country is about 26.3 million in the subordinate courts and over 3
million in the High Courts in India (Hindustan Times, 2007).
By the early eighties, the situation had become alarming, the array of public
interest litigations that have clogged the courts since then, is an indicator of

the seriousness of the problem at hand. A system that was designed to

handle a specific target group,i.e. convicts had now been taken over by
another, for which the system was poorly prepared, i.e. undertrials.
Investments in the welfare sector by the government reduced considerably
in terms of institutional set up, manpower, training, and service delivery.
There was a gradual neglect of the criminal justice system, and custodial
institutions in particular.
PRISON ACT 1894
minimum conditions for upkeep and treatment of prisoners and imposes
limitations on custodial authorities to the type of treatment that can be given
to those in penal custody.

Section 4 provides for proper accommodation for prisoners.

Section 7 casts an obligation on the State Government to provide for

temporary accommodation in case of overcrowding and outbreak of

epidemic.

Section 13 makes the Medical Officer (M.O.) responsible for sanitary

conditions in prisons.

Section 14 provides that the M.O. is required to submit a report

regarding the mental condition of a prisoner whenever it appears that he is

not fit.
The Act also provides for separation of male from female prisoners,
undertrial from convicted prisoners and male prisoners under the age of 21
years from those above 21 years. The various provisions of the Act are the
guiding force behind the Prison Manuals formulated by each State. The Model
Prison Manual (1970) drafted by the All India Jail Manual Committee, has also
laid down the guiding principles based on which many States have drafted or

upgraded their respective State Prison Manuals. Some of the common

features of these Manuals are:
>

Undertrial prisoners are permitted to wear their own clothing, eat

home-cooked

food

and

bring

books

inside

and

subscribe

to

newspapers/magazines, etc. from their own sources.

>

Convicted

prisoners,

who

have

been

sentenced

to

rigorous

imprisonment, are not allowed to work for more than nine hours a day. The
type of work to be assigned to a prisoner is to be decided by the M.O. based
on the physical examination of the prisoner every fifteen days.
>

Punishments in prison are for offences like wilful disobedience, use of

force, foul language, etc. The punishments include hard labour, separate
confinement, reduction of diet, etc., but no two punishments can be
combined, which may have adverse effect on the health of the prisoner.
>

Meetings (mulakat) with family members is allowed in a regulated

manner at specified intervals, both for convicts as well as undertrials, as per

the Prison Manuals of different States, ranging from twice a week to once a
month, depending on the State Manual and the category of the prisoner
(undertrial or convict).
>

Rules on release on parole and furlough (short leave) are also specified

in the various Prison Manuals for prisoners as a means of maintaining

contact with the family and society, which would be helpful in rehabilitation.
Rules existing in the Prisons Act state that prisoners should be temporarily
released subject to certain conditions for a period not exceeding ten days,
excluding time required for journey.
>

Prisoners enjoy all political rights as ordinary citizens, such as right to

vote or right to fight elections. These rights are subject to certain

disqualifications, as per the Representation of Peoples Act, i.e. those who
have been sentenced for offences involving moral turpitude

SUPREME COURT AND HIGH COURT RULINGS

The Supreme Court and various High Court rulings on prisoners rights also
need mention, as these rulings have interpreted the laws of the land based
on writ petitions and Public Interest Litigations (PILs) filed from time to time
on the issue.
(1)

Protection of the Fundamental Rights of Prisoners

In the case of Patnaik (AIR 1974 SC 2092), Justice Chandrachud held that
Convicts are not, be mere reason of the conviction, denuded of all the
fundamental rights which they otherwise possess. A compulsion under the
authority of law, following upon a conviction, to live in a prison-house entails
by its own force the deprivation of fundamental freedoms like the right to
move freely throughout the territory of India or the right to practice a
profession.... But the Constitution guarantees other freedoms like the right to
acquire, hold and dispose off property for the exercise of which incarceration
can be no impediment.
In Writ Petition No. 1822 of 1985 of the A.P. High Court, while considering the
question of wages for work done by prisoners, said that In the general realm
of reason too, one can find no support for the view that the State can deny
payment to the prisoners work or that the State is under no obligation to
provide any work to the prisoner. Idleness, particularly forced idleness, is
sure to destroy a mans life and personal liberty.
In Hussainara Khatoon (1979 Cr.L.J. 1045) and earlier in Hoskot (AIR 1978 SC
1548), the Supreme Court declared that the right to free legal services is an
essential ingredient of reasonable, fair and just procedure implicit in the right
to personal liberty under Article 21.

In the Francis Coralie case (AIR 1981 SC 746), it was observed that the right
to life for prisoners includes the right to live with human dignity and includes
adequate nutrition, clothing, shelter, facilities for reading, writing and
expressing oneself in diverse forms, freely moving about and mixing with
fellow human beings.
(2)

Right to Fair Procedure

(i)

Right to bail: In Babu Singhs case [(1978) 2 SCR 777j, the Supreme

Court laid down that the rejection of bail without any reason, amounts to
unreasonable deprivation of an individuals liberty.
(ii)

Right to be represented in court: In the Hoskot case (AIR 1978 SC

1548), the Supreme Court laid down two ingredients of fair procedure:
(a) A convict should be provided with a copy of the judgment within a
reasonable period so that he may exercise his right to appeal, and
(a) Free legal aid should be provided to the person if he is not able to arrange
the same owing to disability or poverty.
(iii)

Right to speedy trial: Fair procedure includes a reasonable speedy trial.

In the Hussainara Khatoon case (AIR 1979 SC 1360), the Court stated that a
speedy trial is implicit in the broad sweep and content of Article 21, as
interpreted in the Maneka Gandhi case (AIR 1978 SC 597).
(3)

Political Rights

(i)

Freedom of expression: Freedom of thought and expression includes

the right to express ones views including in writing or by publishing ones

writings. This right is available to prisoners within reasonable restrictions (as
laid down in the censorship rules of Prison Manuals). The Supreme Court in
the Pandurang Sanzgiri case (AIR 1966 SC 424) observed that any procedure
which permits the impairment of the individuals rights without giving him a

reasonable opportunity of being heard should be condemned as unfair and

unreasonable.
(ii)

Press interviews: In the Prabha Dutt case, the Supreme Court (AIR 1982

SC 6), ruled that a prisoner is entitled to give a press interview, if the press is
willing to take his interview. A death sentence prisoner, who is willing to write
something which is of great scientific, historical or educational value may be
given enough opportunity and time to complete his work by suspending
execution of death penalty for a reasonable period of time.
(iii)

Freedom of association: Prisoners can become a member of any

organization, social, cultural or political, as per Article 19(1 )(c) of the

Constitution.
(4)

Some Specific Rulings Regarding the Role of Social Workers in Prison

In the landmark judgment of Sunil Batra (AIR 1980 SC

1579), the Supreme Court laid stress on the U.N. Declaration:
The treatment of prisoners should emphasise not their exclusion from the
community but their continuing part in it. Community agencies should
therefore, be enlisted wherever possible to assist the staff of the institution
in the task of the social rehabilitation of the prisoners. There should be, in
connection with every institution, social workers, charged with the duty of
maintaining and improving the desirable relations of a prisoner with his
family and with valuable social agencies. Steps should be taken to safeguard
to the maximum extent compatible with law and the sentence, the rights
relating civil interests, social security and physical security of prisoners.
In Kishor Singhs case (AIR 1981 SC. 625), the Supreme Court has observed
that solitary confinement violates the spirit of the Constitution, if applied
without any judicial control, on flimsy grounds, without giving the prisoner a
reasonable opportunity of being heard and cannot be regarded as fair, just

and reasonable within the sense of Article 21 of the Indian Constitution

(Government of India, 1987.
RECOMMENDATIONS OF REFORM COMMITTEES
The first initiative towards reforming the prison system in the country was
made with the setting up of the Indian Jails Committee in 1919, which made
some far-reaching recommendations on the issue. After independence, the
All India Jail Manual Committee was set up in 1957 as an effort by the
Government of India, to standardize the practices and facilities offered to
prisoners in the various States in the country. An expert from the United
Nations, Professor Walter C. Reckless was invited to help formulate the
correctional policy of the nation and he played an instrumental role in the
setting up of this Committee. Based on the recommendations of this
Committee, the Model Prison Manual was published by the Central
Government in 1970. This Manual was to serve as a standard for the States
and Union Territories to upgrade their manuals. A Working Group on Prisons
was set up in 1972 which gave its report a year later, reiterating some of the
recommendations of earlier committees and reports and adding some new
ones.
The findings of the National Police Commission (Government of India, 1977)
shook the conscience of the nation, when one of its members and a
distinguished police officer, K.F. Rustomji, made public the pitiable condition
of undertrial prisoners in the country. These findings became the substance
for a slew of public interest litigations on the issue and paved the way for the
landmark judgment of Justice Bhagwati in the Supreme Court in which he
deemed that even a postcard written by an aggrieved person or a citizen can
be converted into a*writ petition in public interest.
Following these developments, the Government of India constituted the now
much discussed Mulla Committee (Government of India, 1983) to enquire
into prison conditions and make recommendations to improve the situation

of prisoners. The report is still an oft-quoted one by experts and officials as a

standard

document

which

needs

implementation.

Some

of

the

recommendations of the Report are as follows:

Creation of separate institutions for women offenders [Vol. I, Para (ii) of

Annexure V-A, p. 681.

Classification of prisons and prisons/annexes for women offenders [Vol.

I, Annexure IV-A, Chapter III, p. 45].

Appointment of a full-time lady medical officer for prisons/annexes

where there are a sufficient number of women prisoners. At other places,

appointment of part-time and/or visiting lady medical officers (from the
nearest hospital) [Chapter VII, Para 13.5, p. 85].

Special consideration is to be given to women prisoners towards their

segregation, protection, care, treatment, training and rehabilitation. It further

recommends that police should treat women with due courtesy and dignity
during investigations, in the presence of a lawyer or a relative and a female
staff, and she should not be called to the police station for investigation.
Women should be kept in separate lock-ups and should be escorted by
female escorts. It also states that bail should be liberally granted to women
undertrial prisoners and the Probation of Offenders Act should be extensively
used to keep them away from prisons.

Special emphasis is to be given on the involvement of community

participation and NGOs in corrections. It recommends a two pronged

approach to tackle the problem of crime and treatment and rehabilitation of
offendersto counter socio-economic conditions which contribute to crime
and extend all possible help to released prisoners to re-settle in society. It
spells out creation of community based treatment programs and the
involvement of the community with institutional, aftercare and rehabilitation
of offenders. It calls for involvement of the services of experts from the field

of education, medicine, psychiatry, law, social work and journalism in

framing and running the correctional policy at functional and advisory levels.

Involvement of the voluntary sector in adult education, legal aid,

health,

recreation, cultural activities,

victim support, family

support,

counselling and guidance and rehabilitation. It also lays down the need for
the creation of a Committee at the State level for this purpose and giving
financial and non-financial support to NGOs interested to work in this field.
Another landmark report in this connection is the report of the National
Expert Committee on Women Prisoners headed by Justice Krishna Iyer
(Government of India, 1987). This Committee was set up by the Department
of

Women

and

Child

Development,

Government

of

India

to

make

recommendations to ameliorate the conditions of women in custody. Some of

the recommendations of this Committee are supportive of reformative,
correctional and rehabilitative aspects. These are:

National Prison Service: Setting up of a National Prison Service to

professionalise prison staff (Vol. I, Para 359, p. 242). This has been also dealt
with in Chapter XXIV of the Report of the All India Committee on Jail Reforms,
1983.
9 Gender Sensitization of Prison Staff: The Committee has given a strong
recommendation to orient custodial officers to adopt a progressive approach
to correctional work, especially as it affects women inmates.

Role of Social Workers: The Committee has recommended an active

reaching out to the prisoner to effectively deal with the anxieties of inmates,
particularly undertrials, with respect to their families and children. To assist
the
prisoners more usefully, and especially to serve as a liaison between the
prisoner anjJ her family, it is necessary to have trained social workers whose
specific duties would not be custody and security, but to work towards the

social integration of the prisoners. Such social workers could also arrange
activities for undertrial inmates to help them to spend their time
meaningfully, without compulsion. Such social workers would be useful as a
tool to prison management to understand social and group dynamics and to
use it to the advantage of the prisoner as well as the custodial staff. The
social workers counselling input should encompass the custodial staff as well
as the inmates.
Separate Volume on Women Prisoners in Prison Manuals: In order to address
the special needs of women prisoners and to increase the visibility of such a
document, the Committee has recommended developing a separate volume
in the prison manuals for the custody and treatment of women prisoners. A
draft separate volume has been prepared by the Committee. Association of
Para-legal and Social Workers: To increase legal literacy and assist in social
and emotional mainstreaming of women prisoners, the Committee has
recommended the induction of para-legal and social workers to help solve
personal, family and legal problems of prisoners. It has also recommended
activating the system of prison visitors, setting up socio-legal counselling
services, organizing legal camps and offering functional and legal literacy to
prisoners .
Non-official Visitors: The Committee has recommended the appointment of
women social workers in the districts as non-official visitors. The panels
terms

of

reference

should

include

monitoring

of

prison

conditions,

implementation of prison reforms, legal, mental and

rehabilitative assistance, prisoners grievances and staff problems.

Socio-legal

Counselling

Cell:

For

improved

legal

and

social

preparedness of the prisoner, and aid to the overall adjustment process in

prison as well as release from custody, the Committee has recommended
setting up of socio-legal counselling cells in prisons, consisting of social
workers and lawyers, law students or para-legal workers.

Aftercare Services: As per the Committee recommendations aftercare

and aid to prisoners after release, should be viewed as an extension of

probation and of prisoner well-being programs in prison. These activities
should be seen as a continuum of care extended to the offender, whether
before, during or after custody. It has endorsed the recommendation of the
All India Committee on Jail Reforms, 1983, that probation and aftercare
should be merged with the prison department and operate as one. The
Committee has suggested:
>

Setting up of at least one aftercare hostel per district with temporary or

long-term accommodation.
>

Employment placement program.

>

Quota for recruitment in government jobs.

>

Bank loans and subsidies for self-employment.

>

Follow-up of cases.

>

Dissemination of information through media.

Nodal Point for Aftercare: The Committee has recommended the

setting up of a nodal point, embracing probation, socio-legal counselling cells

and aftercare services, designated as Centre for Relief to the Discharged
Prisoner. This will serve as an accredited forum where social welfare, legal,
social work and economic assistance can get together to offer total care
under a single umbrella. It may operate under the overall supervision of the
prison department and managed by voluntary agencies.

Parole and Premature Release: The Committee has recommended th

inclusion of prison welfare officers, district social welfare officers, district

probation officers and voluntary agencies working for the welfare of
prisoners in the Review or Advisory Boards set up in the States for grant of
parole or premature release of convicted prisoners.

A recent initiative in the series of such exercises is the Model Prison Manual
(Government of India, 2003). The report has separate chapters related to
education, vocational training and work programs, welfare, aftercare and
rehabilitation of prisoners. Some of the recommendations from the Model
Prison Manual are:

Education: The report states that the policy should aim at making

every illiterate prisoner literate and developing educational qualifications of

prisoners. It should consist of physical and health, academic, social,
vocational, moral and spiritual and cultural education. Specialised personnel
should be appointed and trained with the above objectives in mind and NGOs
should be extensively involved in these programs. Teachers from the Adult
Education

Department

could

be

deputed

for

this

purpose.

Open

school/university and distance learning systems and the use of audio-visual

aids should be extensively used to achieve the objectives. Libraries should
be set up and manned by trained staff to promote the habit of reading and
for upgrading their skills of neo and semi literates, as well as for fulfilment of
intellectual and knowledge needs of prisoners.

Vocational Training and Work Programs: This chapter lays down

detailed guidelines relating to aims, methods, types, safeguards and

facilities, wages, personnel required to conduct such programs. The chapter
also recommends the creation of a policy on creation of employment
opportunities in the sector, cooperative and agro-based industries promoted
by the State, for released prisoners based on the training received inside
prison.

Welfare of Prisoners: This chapter makes specific provisions for

counselling,

psychotherapy

and

guidance

of

prisoners.

It

makes

recommendations for appointment of welfare officers, psychiatrists and

involvement of NGOs for this purpose.

Aftercare and Rehabilitation-. This chapter divides the aftercare needs

and rehabilitation work into intervention required while the individual is

under institutional care, immediately on release from prison and post-release
period. It again reiterates the role of the welfare officer and NGOs for this
purpose. The scope of such work is laid down from emergency assistance on
release, to temporary accommodation, assistance in securing housing,
employment, family support, counselling and guidance, legal aid and
protection from police harassment.
The latest draft on National Policy on Prison Reforms and Correctional
Administration (Government of India, 2007) has further improved on these
recommendations in at least some of the areas of suggested reforms. The
2007 Draft Policy includes some welcome suggestions as far as amendments
to the Prisons Act of 1894 are concerned, such as the introduction of a
provision to provide for aftercare and rehabilitation services and the
appointment of officers to provide legal aid for prisoners, the establishment
of a Research and Development wing, financial assistance to nongovernmental organizations working for the rehabilitation of prisoners and
community-based alternatives to imprisonment for offenders convicted for
relatively minor offences.
CONCLUSION
Since prison management and custodial care are seen as a part of
maintenance of law and order, it is therefore a State subject whereby the
role of the Union Government is recommendatory and persuasive in nature.
In fhis context, there is a need to create a national debate on the issue to
create pressure on the state governments to move in the direction of
bringing far-reaching reforms in this sector. In sum, in seeking to improve
prison conditions, one has to address a range of issues such as the low
personnel-population ratio compared to countries that have more effective
justice delivery systems, creating a specialised cadre of correctional staff at

both junior and senior levels, strengthening the legal aid system towards
access to justice for marginalized sections, restructuring of the educational,
library facilities and vocational programs in prisons, providing financial and
infrastructure support to voluntary organizations working on the rights,
welfare

and

rehabilitation

of

custodialised

populations,

and

creating

accountability systems in both government and civil society actors working

in this sector.

BIBLIOGRAPHY AND REFERENCES