Back

Empowering Minds in Confinement: Bombay HC’s Landmark Ruling on Prisoner Education

Courtesy/By: PARAM SAKET SARANG | 03 Oct 2024 Views:10693

Empowering Minds in Confinement: Bombay HC’s Landmark Ruling on Prisoner Education

Introduction

In Mahesh Raut v. State of Maharashtra, Criminal Writ Petition No. 3999 of 2024, the Bombay High Court upheld people's basic right to an education, even when incarcerated, in a significant and progressive ruling. The Division Bench, which consists of Justices AS Gadkari and Neela Gokhale, highlighted the constitutional importance of education and rehabilitation within the legal system by emphasising that incarceration does not take away a person's ability to seek an education. The legal dispute about Mahesh Raut's admittance to a law course while incarcerated—an accused in the Bhima-Koregaon case—was resolved in this case on September 19, 2024.

Case Background

Accused's Legal Status:- At now, Taloja Central Prison is housing Mahesh Raut, an accused party in the Bhima-Koregaon violence case. He is charged under many sections of the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act (UAPA) and the Indian Penal Code (IPC). Despite this, he qualified for the Maharashtra Common Entrance Test (CET) for law admissions with a merit rating of 95.

The argument of the Petitioner:- Senior Advocate Mihir Desai, Raut's legal representative, contended that Raut's incarceration should not restrict his access to education, which is protected as a basic right under Article 21. Desai stressed that the petitioner was given a provisional seat at Siddharth College of Law after following the correct procedures for admission. The petitioner's imprisonment prevented him from being physically present for document verification, which was the main point of contention.

Arguments and Reactions

Right to Education of Petitioner:- The petitioner maintained that regardless of a person's state of confinement, the right to education is a basic right. Raut had legitimately shown up for the CET, and it would be against his rights to be denied entry due to his imprisonment.

College and University Opposition:- The University of Mumbai and Siddharth College's legal representatives objected to the petition, claiming that the petitioner would not be able to fulfil the mandatory attendance requirements of 75% for law classes while incarcerated. They argued that engagement in academics and verification needs a physical presence.

Particular Approval and Immediacy:- No concerns were voiced when Raut was permitted by a Special Court to appear for the CET. Since the deadline for admissions was approaching, the case needed to be handled urgently by the courts.

Court’s Observations

Education Is Not Barred by Imprisonment:- The Court decided that a person's ability to seek higher education should not be restricted by their incarceration. Raut's fundamental rights would be violated if he were denied entrance to the law college since he had legitimately obtained a seat.

The college and university's role:- The Court did not specify whether Raut's next of kin would be permitted to fulfil the requirements of document verification on his behalf, leaving it up to the law college's judgment. As an alternative, the Court approved obtaining Raut's signature on the required paperwork while he was incarcerated.

Attendance and Qualification for Exam:- The Court made it clear that although Raut was admitted, he would still need to fulfil the standard academic standards, which included attendance and test eligibility. If he didn't meet these requirements, the College and University would still be able to refuse him entry to the examination.

This ruling is a positive step in the direction of a criminal justice system that is more compassionate and innovative. By granting the petitioner permission to continue his study, the Court has recognised the value of education as a cornerstone of individual and community growth. Furthermore, it clearly states that legal institutions should prioritise rehabilitation over punitive actions. How rights and institutional obligations are balanced demonstrates a sophisticated awareness of legal and practical issues. Future conversations on the rights of inmates and the value of educational opportunities in rehabilitation attempts will surely be influenced by this case.

Important Legal Consequences

The right to education:- The ruling reaffirms unequivocally that every citizen, even those incarcerated, is entitled to education as a component of their Article 21 right to life and dignity. The case serves as a reminder that educational establishments must respect and provide for the rights of every person, even those who are accused of crimes.

Harmonizing Essential Rights with Realistic Restrictions:- The ruling exhibits a meticulous weighing of the petitioner's basic rights against the pragmatic limitations of professional training. The Court made it plain that there would be no exceptions to the attendance and academic restrictions, even as it guaranteed that Raut's dreams of obtaining an education would not be restricted.

The Role of Judges in Rehabilitation:- The ruling demonstrates the judiciary's responsibility to guarantee that the criminal justice system not only provides punishment but also helps people get the knowledge and chances for reformation they need to begin their journey toward recovery. This is consistent with the goal of rehabilitation theory punishment, which is to help people reintegrate into society.

A prisoner is any individual who is held in custody within a jail or prison due to the commission of an act prohibited by the law of the land. Also referred to as an inmate, a prisoner is a person who is deprived of their liberty against their will. This deprivation can occur through forceful restraint or confinement. A prisoner is typically confined in prison after receiving legitimate punishment from a court or when lawfully remanded by the court for committing an offence.

As per the Prison Act of 1894

According to Section 3(2), a "criminal prisoner" is any person who has been lawfully placed under arrest by a court-martial order, a writ, warrant, or other authority with criminal jurisdiction.
Any criminal prisoner condemned by a court or court-martial is defined as a "convicted criminal prisoner" under Section 3 (3). This also applies to those who are imprisoned by the Prisoners Act of 1871 or Chapter VIII of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1882.
A "civil prisoner" is any prisoner who is not designated as a criminal prisoner, according to Section 3 (4).

Prisoner classification

Pretrial inmates:- People who have been charged with a crime but have not yet been put on trial.
Detainees awaiting trial:- Those who are on trial right now but haven't been found guilty yet.
Convicted inmates:- Those who are now serving their sentences after being declared guilty by the court.
Retained:- Being kept in administrative or security-related preventative custody, sometimes without being allowed to defend themselves.

The objective of Educational Programmes in Prisons

Prison education programs' main goal is to redirect inmates' energies toward productive and artistic endeavours. These programs aim to give prisoners self-assurance, teach them social responsibility, make them aware of society's standards, and promote the behaviours and mindsets necessary for their successful reintegration back into society. The educational programs also seek to raise convicts' morale, mental health, and social standing by educating them about the futility of engaging in illegal activity.

An all-encompassing prison education program aims to:-

Give illiterate prisoners the chance to complete at least a rudimentary education.
Continue to provide literate prisoners with facilities so they can continue their education.
Gain a deeper comprehension of the responsibilities and duties of citizenship.
Encourage offenders to adopt a more law-abiding lifestyle by improving their views toward society.
Aid in the development of moral and social virtues so that prisoners can successfully reintegrate into society after their release.
By providing them with both individual and group counselling, you may assist prisoners in developing their personalities and social skills.
Encourage people to see the pointlessness of leading a criminal life and the benefits of abiding by the law.

Suggestions and Personal Opinion on Educational and Rehabilitation Programs for Prisoners

Art and Craft instruction:- It is recommended that prisoners receive instruction in art and crafts, as this might potentially serve as a long-term source of income for them. To display and sell their works, convicts can arrange exhibits with the assistance of the jail administration. Their well-being and the promotion of their artistic and craft abilities might both benefit from the money raised by these kinds of shows.
Computer instruction:- Prisons should have sufficient resources accessible for computer instruction. By doing this, inmates might keep up with contemporary technology, which could significantly improve their prospects of finding work after they are released from prison. Today's world requires computer literacy, therefore, giving inmates these abilities would help them effectively reintegrate into society.
Cooperation with Open Universities:- Open universities such as Vardhman Mahaveer Open University and IGNOU ought to be connected to all jails. Every jail might have an education centre run by open institutions that would regularly provide a variety of academic courses. Inmates would be able to further their education and increase their prospects of finding work following their release by doing this. This is particularly significant because other jails in Rajasthan have already implemented this measure, establishing a national model for others to follow.
Employment Registration and Rehabilitation:- The government ought to set up a methodical inmate rehabilitation program that includes creating career-focused curricula based on the interests and talents of the inmates. Prisoners could register with the state's employment market after finishing these courses. This would facilitate their reintegration into society by helping them find employment upon their release. Rehab that is organised and includes job placements, vocational training, and ongoing supervision can lower recidivism rates and encourage ex-offenders to live law-abiding lifestyles.
Requirement for a Permanent Prison Commission:- There is a pressing need for a commission specifically focused on prisons, similar to commissioners for women, minorities, and human rights. This commission, which would be led by a retired Supreme Court or High Court judge, would be in charge of handling prison-related matters, keeping an eye on the rehabilitation process, and making sure that the socio-legal difficulties of inmates are sufficiently taken care of. Such a permanent organisation would guarantee continuous reform and enhancement of jail management.

Conclusion

To sum up, the ruling in Mahesh Raut v. State of Maharashtra by the Bombay High Court highlights the importance of education as a basic right, even for those who are jailed. By permitting prisoners to pursue higher education, the decision establishes a progressive precedent that prioritises rehabilitation over harsh isolation. This case demonstrates how important it is for the courts to make sure that prisons function as places of reform as well as places of imprisonment, allowing inmates to make valuable contributions to society after their release. The case also highlights the need for comprehensive prison education programs, partnerships with open institutions, and organised efforts toward rehabilitation.

The broader objectives of promoting reintegration and lowering recidivism are in line with the empowerment of inmates via education, and the creation of a special Prison Commission might guarantee a continued focus on the welfare of prisoners. The criminal justice system's emphasis on compassionate care and long-term personal transformation is strengthened by this decision.