The Supreme Court has issued a series of binding directions to all States and Union Territories to expand and strengthen Open Correctional Institutions or open prisons.
Open prisons refer to minimum-security correctional facilities designed without traditional walls or bars. Prisoners are expected to serve out their jail sentence under minimal security, thereby shifting the main focus of imprisonment from punishment to rehabilitation and reformation.
In a February 26 ruling, a Bench of Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Sandeep Mehta noted that prisons in India were operating at over 120 per cent occupancy, with some states reporting more than 150 per cent overcrowding. Given the advantages of open prisons, including in tackling such prison congestion problems, the court issued a slew of directions to expand their functionality in India.
It has also constituted a High-Powered Committee for Reform and Governance of Open Correctional Institutions (OCIs or open prisons) to formulate standards and streamline the governance of open prisons across India. The committee will be headed by former Supreme Court Justice Ravindra Bhat and is expected to submit its report within six months.
Commenting on how open prisons can help serve the cause of reformative justice, the Court also observed, "This Court has long envisaged prisons as institutions of correction, where dignity, self-respect and social reintegration are not aspirational ideals, but constitutional necessities. The emphasis on meaningful work, vocational training, payment of wages, humane living conditions, and maintenance of family ties reflects a coherent judicial philosophy that punishment must be tempered by compassion and directed towards reform. Open and semi-open correctional institutions, premised on trust and self-discipline, naturally align with this vision... The transformation of prisons from sites of suffering to spaces of opportunity is thus integral to the promise of justice under the Constitution."
It was pointed out that many states either do not have any open prisons at all or are severely under-utilising existing ones. In some states, occupancy in open prisons is as low as six per cent to 20 per cent. Several Union Territories have no OCIs whatsoever. The court also found that women prisoners were either excluded or grossly under-represented in OCIs. In multiple states, women are not eligible for transfer to open prisons. Even where eligible, no actual transfers have taken place.
The Court was hearing a writ petition filed by human rights activist Suhas Chakma in 2020. The petition highlighted alarming overcrowding in prisons and sought structural, long-term measures to address inhumane and degrading conditions faced by inmates. Initially, the case was heard along with the suo motu proceedings relating to COVID-19 in prisons. Later, it was de-tagged. In May 2024, the court identified Open Correctional Institutions as one of the most viable long-term solutions to prison congestion.
The data placed before the court revealed serious concerns. The Apex Court also expressed disappointment over the response of various states in taking steps to enhance or make functional open prisons despite its advantages. It has now directed the states with no OCIs to assess the feasibility and necessity of establishing OCIs within three months.
Follow us
