Unless arbitrary, shifting prisoner from one jail to another can't be interfered with: Supreme Court

New Delhi: The Supreme Court has said transfer of a prisoner from one prison to another is purely an administrative decision, which cannot be interfered with, unless it is arbitrary and contrary to law.

The apex court also emphasised the need for pursuing diligently the objective of reforms and rehabilitation of the prisoners in order to let them enjoy their right to dignified life under Article 21 of the Constitution.

"The State recognises that a prisoner loses his right to liberty but still maintains his right to be treated as a human being and as person. His human dignity shall be maintained and all basic amenities should be made available to him," a bench of Justices J B Pardiwala and R Mahadevan said.

In a judgment on January 17, 2025, the court directed the Jharkhand government to implement effective prison administration and to protect the interests of prisoners.

"It is the words of Fyodor Dostoevsky, 'The degree of civilisation in a society can be judged by entering its prisons'. Prisons are considered as the ‘tailend’ of the criminal justice system...Therefore, it is imperative on the part of the prison authorities to rehabilitate the prisoners into law abiding citizen, besides maintaining security and rule of law in the prison," the bench said.

The court upheld an order by Jharkhand Inspector General of Prisons, Ranchi to shift gangster, Vikash Tiwary alias Bikash Tiwary alias Bikash Nath from Lok Nayak Jai Prakash Narayan Central Jail, Hazaribagh, to Central Jail, Dumka.

The court found the transfer of the respondent not only lawful, but also necessary for his safety and security.

Allowing the Jharkhand government's appeal, the bench set aside the High Court's order of August 21, 2023, which quashed the transfer order with regard to the respondent, already convicted in a murder case, and facing 10 other FIRs, to prevent gang war inside the prison.

It also directed the Jharkhand government to formulate or expedite the formulation of a Jail Manual incorporating the applicable provisions of the 2016 Model Prison Manual, for effective prison administration and ensure its strict compliance by the prison authorities.

With regard to issue at hand, the court stressed, it has already been held that the right of a prisoner under Article 21 of the Constitution to be lodged in a jail and general prohibition against his transfer to a distantly located jail within or outside the state is not absolute.

However, the court said, the transfer of prisoners from one jail to another is not a matter of routine and must be approached with circumspection.

"In the present case, the reason given for transfer was the existence of imminent possibility of a gang war and due to insufficient kachpals, the prison authorities would find it difficult to effectively manage such a situation, if it arises," the bench said.

The court, at the same time, underscored that it is essential to continuously monitor the physical conditions prevailing in the prison, compliance with basic and fundamental rights of the prisoners, etc.

It emphasised that discipline and order should be maintained with firmness, but with no more restriction than is necessary for safe custody and well-ordered community life, with due regard to the maintenance of the rights of prisoners.

Dealing with the instant matter, the bench pointed out this court has repeatedly recommended an overhaul of prison administration by suggesting reforms in treatment of prisoners and management of prisons.

Though the Model Prison Manual came into existence in the year 2003, after clarion calls by this court, there is no clear-cut picture regarding prison administration and the facilities available to the prisoners in the prisons, the bench said.