Advocacy is vital for translating health goals into policy and gaining support for initiatives that improve public health. Early prison health advocacy relied on humanitarian appeals but had limited success due to public and custodial apathy. By the mid-20th century, a rights-based approach emerged, with courts mandating health standards, but penal populism reduced public support and led to barriers against prisoner lawsuits. A proposed public health-focused advocacy combines humanitarian and rights-based ideals with public self-interest, emphasizing the risks of released prisoners with untreated diseases re-entering society.
According to the latest report on Prison Statistics India (PSI) 2022, from the National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB), India currently detains 573,220 prisoners, with three out of four being under trial. Among them, two-thirds belong to marginalized caste groups such as the Scheduled Caste (SC), Scheduled Tribe (ST), and Other Backward Caste (OBC) communities — a percentage that has remained consistent at over 60% for the past 25 years, as the India Spend portal on Prison Watch indicates. As we look through the statistics, it often comes to notice how there is no piece of information about the prisoners with some sort of physical or mental disability.
Prisoners
Nelson Mandela famously said, “No one truly knows a nation until one has been inside its jails. A nation should be judged not by how it treats its highest citizens but its lowest ones.”
Both sexes of prisoners have shared histories of abuse; however, women in prison are statistically more likely to have experienced physical and sexual trauma. Indian women have historically served as the cornerstone of both family and society. They create, nurture, protect, and fortify life.
However, the number of incarcerated women has grown significantly across nations in the past decade. Women already make up over 10% of the prison population in eleven different countries. Women’s poverty is significantly linked to their criminal activity and incarceration. Due to their inability to pay bail or fines for minor infractions, women are at greater risk of being incarcerated. Most female offenders originate from socially and economically underprivileged groups.
Generally, they have dependent children, are young, unemployed, and have little education. Many have a history of substance and alcohol misuse. A significant percentage have been victims of sexual abuse or assault. However, incarceration is typically more stigmatized for women than for men, and those who have served time may face rejection from their families and communities. Although incarceration affects both genders, little attention is given to the distinct issues women face. This may be due to their small percentage in the total prison population.
Every individual who is denied freedom must always be treated with compassion and respect for their intrinsic worth. Fundamental rights remain with the prisoners at the gates (Sunil Batra v. Delhi Administration). All human rights — political, economic, social, cultural, and civil — should be equally enjoyed and protected by women (CEDAW). Female inmates must not be subjected to violence, exploitation, or discrimination. Due to their gender, they are a particularly vulnerable group within jails.
The majority of female inmates are unaware of their rights. Being away from their families increases the risk of depression and mental health issues. They are particularly susceptible to sexual assault and other forms of violence. Pregnant inmates have specific dietary and medical needs. Compared to men, women inmates often face more health-related challenges and limited awareness of healthy living. The issues are worse in smaller sub-jails. Low literacy prevents many women from understanding the legal system, and most are unaware of their case progress. They must be informed about jail legal service clinics, their right to appeal, and the availability of free legal aid.
In India, nearly 1,800 children under six reside in jails with their mothers. Some are even born while their mothers are incarcerated. Their dietary, recreational, health, and educational needs must be safeguarded, along with efforts to prepare their identification documents. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in R.D. Upadhyay vs. State of Andhra Pradesh & Others, AIR 2006 SC 1946 recognized the rights of women prisoners and children living with them in jails.
Sheela Barse v. State of Maharashtra, 1983
This landmark judgment emphasized the position of prisoners and the necessary legal reforms. The following directives were issued:
- A list of all under-trial prisoners must be sent to the Legal Aid Committee of the district where the jail is located, including:
- Date of entry into jail
- Charges filed
- Gender-wise separation
- Facilities must be provided for lawyers nominated by the District Legal Aid Committee to enter the jail and interview prisoners seeking legal assistance.
- Female interrogations must be conducted only in the presence of female police officers/constables.
- Upon arrest, the police must immediately inform the nearest Legal Aid Committee. The Committee must provide legal assistance at State cost, if the accused is willing. State Government must fund the Legal Aid Committee to fulfill this direction.
Babul Khan v. State of Karnataka, 2020
In this case, the Central Government directed State Governments and Union Territories to provide necessary facilities to inmates to maintain human dignity. Key points included:
- Female prisoners with children require more care, nourishment, and added food and medical provisions.
- Women prisoners must be housed separately from men, in accordance with prison manuals and relevant laws.
- Alternative arrangements must be made for children if a woman prisoner falls ill.
- Sleeping facilities for mothers and children must be adequate, clean, and hygienic.
- Children must receive proper education and recreation.
- While mothers work, children should be placed in crèches under the care of female staff.
- Crèches and nurseries should be attached to women’s prisons. Children below 3 years go to crèches; those aged 3–6 to nurseries, preferably outside the prison.
Gobardhan Singh v. State of UP
This case emphasized the prisoner’s right to legal counsel and cited the landmark judgment of Hussainara Khatoon v. State of Bihar.
The following points were focused upon by the court while concluding the case:
- The District Judges shall also ensure that Jail visitor lawyers on the panel of legal aid lawyers pay regular visits to the District or Central jails in the district at least twice a month, to take up cases of prisoners who want legal aid and who have spent more than 5 years in jail. Efforts should be made to appoint women lawyers to the panel of jail visitors who could facilitate interviewing and providing legal services to neglected women prisoners.
- Legal aid, such as moving or pressing bail applications or conducting trials on request, should be offered even to under-trial prisoners or prisoners convicted by Magistrates or Assistant Sessions Courts whose appeals are pending at the District Court level. These prisoners have engaged lawyers, but their lawyers are not appearing or pressing their bail or conducting their trials, or the prisoners cannot afford further fees for their lawyers.
- Where prisoners are unable to obtain bail for want of adequate sureties or lack of proper verification for 3 months after the bail order, the Sessions or the Magistrates Courts may consider either reducing the bail amount, or releasing the prisoner on a personal bond, where the bail bonds have not been fixed by the Superior Court, if the prisoner has roots in the community, and does not have criminal antecedents, or is extremely poor, or a young or very old person, or a woman or a person suffering from some serious ailment or infirmity. If the release of the prisoner is being held up for want of local sureties, the concerned courts could consider doing away with this requirement.
All these case laws are evidence to prove how the conditions of women in jails have deteriorated over the years and what the court and the government have taken effective measures.
Situation of Women Prisoners during the Pandemic:
Globally, over 11 million people are incarcerated on any given day, according to Penal Reform International’s 2020 Global Prison Trends Report. The rapid spread of COVID-19 within prisons worldwide has raised significant concerns, with cases reported in countries such as Canada, Iran, Pakistan, Moldova, and the United States. Women’s prisons have not been spared from the outbreak, as illustrated by alarming statistics like those from Joliette Institution for Women in Quebec, Canada, where approximately 60% of inmates contracted COVID-19. These outbreaks pose a substantial public health challenge, as incarcerated individuals will eventually reintegrate into the broader community. Ensuring effective correctional measures is essential, as these actions directly influence society’s health.
The situation in India due to the pandemic was catastrophic. To avoid the contagion of COVID-19 virus in prisons, the Supreme Court of India directed the constitution of High-Power Committees headed by each High Court to oversee the de-congestion of prisons during the pandemic. The court noted that ‘prisons can be fertile breeding grounds for incubation of COVID-19’. During this time, one of the major problems at hand was the threat of mass contagion posing specific challenges to women, children, and gender and sexual minorities in prison and other custodial minorities. Women inmates in male-defined prisons governed by male rules of incarceration experience specific forms of discrimination, deprivation, and violence.
To ensure the decongestion of prisons, the High-Power Committee, chaired by Justice Hima Kohli, devised a method wherein interim bails were given to women undertrials in custody for 15 days or more, and no fresh arrests of pregnant women or mothers with babies were made during the pandemic. Keeping in mind the high-risk factor, it was also ensured that not all women were released; some charged with grave offenses were denied bail to create a balance and not invite more problems.
To maintain personal hygiene and stop the spread of COVID-19, women inmates faced severe shortages of hygiene supplies like soap, sanitary napkins, and clean water. The difficulties faced by female prisoners were made worse by the absence of access to menstrual health items, which resulted in inadequate cleanliness and elevated health hazards. Furthermore, the overcrowding and frequently unhygienic conditions in jails increased the risk of infection and skin problems such as rashes, urinary tract infections, and fungal infections.
Another urgent concern was access to clean water since many prisons lacked enough supplies for handwashing, drinking, and sanitation. Attempts to uphold hygienic standards were further hampered by the scarcity of soap and disinfectants. Overflowing toilets and clogged drainage systems became commonplace in many facilities due to inadequate waste management systems, which also contributed to unhygienic living conditions.
These shortcomings disproportionately affected female detainees, especially those with special hygiene requirements like older inmates and pregnant women. Many were compelled to rely on meager personal supplies that were sent by relatives or outside donors, both of which were interrupted by pandemic-related limitations. In addition to having an impact on the convicts’ physical condition, the lack of regular and adequate sanitary supplies made them feel humiliated and powerless.
Systemic improvements are needed to address these issues, such as better infrastructure, standardized supply chains for personal hygiene products, and gender-responsive regulations that take into account the particular hygienic requirements of women who are incarcerated.
Conclusion:
The COVID-19 pandemic exposed and intensified the vulnerabilities faced by women prisoners, highlighting the urgent need for systemic reforms in correctional facilities. The lack of access to adequate healthcare, hygiene, and mental health support during the pandemic underscored the need for a gender-sensitive approach to prison management. Addressing the unique challenges faced by incarcerated women requires targeted interventions that prioritize their physical, mental, and emotional well-being.
Governments and policymakers must take proactive steps to implement humane policies that ensure the dignity and rights of women prisoners. Providing adequate healthcare, addressing gender-specific needs, and creating opportunities for rehabilitation and reintegration are critical in building a prison system that aligns with human rights principles.
Ultimately, the pandemic serves as a wake-up call to rethink and reform prison policies to foster an environment where incarcerated women are treated with dignity, provided with essential services, and given opportunities for a better future post-incarceration.
References:
- V.R. Krishnaiyer, Sunil Batra Etc v. Delhi Administration and Ors. (30 August, 1978), https://indiankanoon.org/doc/162242/
- R.D. Upadhyay vs State of A.P. & Ors (13 April 2006), https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1258611/
- P.N. Bhagwati, Sheela Barse vs State of Maharashtra (15 February, 1983), https://indiankanoon.org/doc/174498/
- K.N. Phaneendra, Babul Khan vs State of Karnataka (19 May 2020), https://indiankanoon.org/doc/137038820/
- Gobardhan Singh and Another vs State of UP (25 September 2013), https://indiankanoon.org/doc/198724542/
- P.N. Bhagwati, Hussainara Khatoon & Ors vs Home Secretary, State Of Bihar (9 March, 1979), https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1373215/
