In an era where human rights are universally championed, an alarming case from the district jail of Etah, Uttar Pradesh, highlights the persistent struggles against inhumane treatment within the prison system. This blog post delves into the tragic and controversial story of Babu Ram Pradhan, a 92-year-old inmate whose rights were grossly violated during his time in custody, brought to light by the dedicated efforts of human rights activist Lenin Raghuvanshi.
The Incident: A Violation of Dignity
On May 10, 2021, Babu Ram Pradhan, an elderly prisoner suffering from chronic lung disease, was taken to the District Hospital Etah for treatment. In a shocking display of disregard for human dignity, one of his legs was handcuffed to the bed by a jail warden. This inhumane act was captured in a photograph that circulated on social media, prompting widespread outrage.
The Supreme Court of India has clearly condemned such practices. In the landmark judgment of Citizens for Democracy vs State of Assam (1995), it was decreed that handcuffing or using any fetters on prisoners during hospital stays or transit is a violation of human rights unless explicitly authorized by a magistrate. Despite this, Babu Ram Pradhan's basic rights were blatantly disregarded.
Administrative Response and Legal Proceedings
Following the public outcry, the Additional Director General (ADG) of Prisons suspended the responsible jail warden, Ashok Kumar, for his negligence. However, Kumar was reinstated in his position on August 31, 2022, albeit with a one-year increment stoppage as a penalty. Another prison warden, Kuldeep Singh, received a warning for his involvement in the incident.
Despite these actions, the Uttar Pradesh administration initially resisted granting compensation to Pradhan’s next of kin (NOK). The magisterial inquiry concluded that Pradhan's death was due to septicemia caused by chronic lung disease and found no negligence contributing to his demise. Consequently, they argued against the compensation, stating there was no direct link between the handcuffing incident and his death.
Human Rights Commission's Intervention
The case took a significant turn when the Human Rights Commission intervened. Lenin Raghuvanshi, the complainant, filed a case with the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC), numbered 12689/24/22/2021. The Commission issued a notice under Section 18 of the Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993, to the Chief Secretary of Uttar Pradesh, questioning why monetary compensation should not be granted to Pradhan’s NOK. They highlighted the unlawful handcuffing as a clear violation of human rights, irrespective of the cause of death.
In its proceedings dated November 14, 2022, the Commission refuted the administration's claims. They emphasized that the very act of handcuffing an elderly, ailing prisoner to a hospital bed constituted a severe violation of human rights, warranting compensation. The Commission ordered the release of Rs. 25,000 to Pradhan’s NOK, directing the Chief Secretary to comply and submit proof of payment within eight weeks.
Detailed Analysis: The Larger Implications
This case is a microcosm of the larger issues plaguing the Indian prison system. The handcuffing of Babu Ram Pradhan, an elderly and sick inmate, highlights systemic failures and the urgent need for reforms in handling prisoners, especially those requiring medical attention. The inhumane treatment meted out to Pradhan underscores a blatant disregard for Supreme Court directives and international human rights standards.
The initial administrative response, marked by the dismissal and subsequent reinstatement of the responsible jail warden, Ashok Kumar, reflects a troubling leniency towards violations of human rights within the prison system. The magisterial inquiry's conclusion, which found no negligence in Pradhan's death, further complicates the quest for justice. It raises questions about the thoroughness and objectivity of such inquiries, especially when systemic biases and procedural lapses may be at play.
Human Rights Commission's Stand: A Beacon of Hope
The NHRC's intervention serves as a beacon of hope in an otherwise grim scenario. By insisting on compensation and acknowledging the violation of Pradhan’s rights, the Commission has reaffirmed the importance of upholding human dignity, regardless of an individual's status as a prisoner. This decision sends a powerful message to prison authorities and the broader justice system about the non-negotiable nature of human rights.
However, the case also highlights the need for continuous vigilance and advocacy by human rights organizations and activists like Lenin Raghuvanshi. Their role in bringing such cases to light and ensuring that justice is pursued cannot be overstated.
Conclusion: A Step Towards Justice
This case underscores the ongoing struggle to uphold human rights within the prison system. The Human Rights Commission’s firm stance serves as a reminder that the dignity of every individual, regardless of their status, must be protected. The compensation, although symbolic, represents a step towards acknowledging and rectifying the wrongs inflicted upon Babu Ram Pradhan.
As society progresses, it is imperative that such violations are not only condemned but actively prevented. The prison system must be reformed to ensure humane treatment for all inmates, aligning with both national and international human rights standards. Babu Ram Pradhan’s case is a stark reminder of the work that remains in the fight for justice and human dignity.
Case Details and Correspondence
Date: 14/11/2022
Subject: Violation of Human Rights of Babu Ram Pradhan
Sir/Madam,
The case No. 12689/24/22/2021 in respect of Lenin Raghuvanshi was placed before the Commission on 14/11/2022. Upon perusing the same, the Commission directed as follows:
The complainant has shared a newspaper clipping which states that the victim, a 92-year-old inmate of the district jail of Etah, was chained to the bed during his treatment in a hospital. The ADG, Prisons, has suspended a jail warden for his negligence.
The Commission vide proceedings dated 19.05.2021 took cognizance of the matter and observed and directed as under:
"It is a very serious matter. The Commission fails to understand what fear is there from a 92-year-old inmate. It shows how insensitive and selfish the jail attendants were. From this incident, a further inference can be drawn: if a 92-year-old ill person is chained to bed during his treatment, the persons who can really be a threat would be treated in a more inhuman and barbaric manner.
Keeping a 92-year-old ill person in jail indicates towards malfunctioning of Sentence Review Boards in the State. The larger and institutional issue is, for protecting the human rights of the prisoners, the functioning of Sentence Review Boards in the State of UP should be improved. Under section 433 Cr. PC and Prison Rules, the Government has powers to commute the sentence through the Sentence Review Board. The functioning of the Sentence Review Board in a professional manner is necessary to decongest jails and relieve the burden of the Government from taking care of a 92-year-old ill person.
The Chief Secretary, Govt. of U.P., be asked to explain as to: 1. When was the last meeting of the Sentence Review Board held? 2. How many cases are pending before the Sentence Review Board? 3. How many sentences have been commuted by the Sentence Review Board in the years 2020 and 2019? 4. What system is being followed in jails for referring matters to the Sentence Review Boards? Let the report be sent within six weeks."
After the issuance of a conditional summon to the Chief Secretary, Govt. of Uttar Pradesh, Lucknow, vide proceedings dated 26.06.2022, several reports on the matter have been received.
The report submitted by the Special Secretary, Prison and Correctional Services, Div-5, Lucknow, dated 06.09.2022, reveals that the deceased convicted accused named Babu Ram Pradhan s/o Balwant Jatav was first sent into judicial custody by the order of the Court in PS Sakit, Etah, Case Crime / no. 72/1984, u/s 302/364 IPC. He was in prison as an undertrial prisoner from 28.03.1984 to 27.06.1984 and was released on bail. After the conclusion of the trial, the accused was again sent to jail as a convicted prisoner from 17.07.1990 to 26.07.1990. The convicted accused was again sent to judicial custody on the directions of the CJM Court Etah on 06.02.2021. On 09.05.2021, the prisoner complained of difficulty in breathing. He was examined by the jail doctor, and his oxygen saturation level was low. After his preliminary treatment, he was referred and shifted to District Hospital Etah and was further referred to JNMC, Aligarh. On 14.05.2021, he was found positive for Covid-19 and thereafter expired during his treatment on 17.05.2021. In this case, late Babu Ram Pradhan served an actual prison term of a total of 06 months and 28 days. Due to his ineligibility for premature release, no action was taken in this regard. It is further intimated in the report that there is no record of Review Board meetings in the prison records, and no cases are pending before the Review Board.
Another report dated 07.09.2022 submitted by the Superintendent, Prison and Correctional Services, HQ, Lucknow, indicates that information regarding the raised points by the Commission in its directions vide proceeding dated 19.05.2021, was sought from the central prisons of Agra, Prayagraj, Bareilly, Varanasi, and District Jail Lucknow. The report reveals that no meetings of the Sentence Review Board (SRB) were held since the last year in any of the five quoted prisons. No cases were pending before any SRB. No commutations were done by the SRB in the years 2019 and 2020. The UP Jail Manual is being followed to refer the matter to the SRB.
The report is taken on record. The reports tabled before the Commission in this case delineate that the convicted prisoner named Babu Ram Pradhan was convicted in PS Sakit, Etah, Case Crime / no. 72/1984, u/s 302/364 IPC. He served a total actual prison time of 06 months and 28 days until his judicial custody death on 17.05.2021. Due to his ineligibility for premature release as per the prevalent UP Jail Manual, no action was taken in this regard. Furthermore, it has been intimated to the Commission that no meeting of the Sentence Review Board had taken place in 2019 and 2020.
The Commission would restrain itself from commenting here on the judicial custody death of the victim Babu Ram Pradhan, as the same is being taken into cognizance by the Commission vide case no. 33428/24/22/2021-JCD.
With regard to the improper functioning of the Sentence Review Board in the State, the Commission directs the Principal Secretary, Prison Administration and Reform Services, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh, to ensure the timely conduct of the meetings of the Sentence Review Board in the prisons. As per the UP Jail Manual prastar no. 234, “Meetings of the revising board shall be convened by the chairman in the months of January and July every year.” The advisory/guidelines issued by the Commission to all the Chief Secretaries/Administrators of State/UTs on the premature release of prisoners vide Commissions letter dated 08.11.1999 and subsequent modification of Paras 3 & 4 of its guidelines issued vide letter no. 233/10/97-98 (FC) dated 26.09.2003, shall be duly complied with.
Further, on the issue of handcuffing the old victim (80+) to the bed during his treatment at the hospital, the Commission takes a strong note of this inhumane treatment given to the late convicted prisoner. The Supreme Court, in its landmark judgment Citizens for Democracy vs State of Assam on 1 May 1995, Writ Petition (civil) 22 of 1995, observed that: “The handcuffing and in addition tying with ropes of the patient-prisoners who are lodged in the hospital is, the least we can say, inhuman and in utter violation of the human rights guaranteed to an individual under International Law and the law of the land. We declare, direct, and lay down as a rule that handcuffs or other fetters shall not be forced on a prisoner - convicted or under-trial - while lodged in a jail anywhere in the country or while transporting or in transit from one jail to another or from jail to court and back. The police and the jail authorities, on their own, shall have no authority to direct the handcuffing of any inmate of a jail in the country or during transport from one jail to another or from jail to court and back. Where the police or the jail authorities have well-grounded basis for drawing a strong inference that a particular prisoner is likely to jump jail or break out of custody, then the said prisoner be produced before the Magistrate concerned and a prayer for permission to handcuff the prisoner be made before the said Magistrate. Any violation of any of the directions issued by us by any rank of police in the country or member of the jail establishment shall be summarily punishable under the Contempt of Court Act apart from other penal consequences under law.”
The perusal of the facts of the case explicitly reveals that the deceased victim/prisoner was handcuffed during his treatment at the hospital. The directions of the Supreme Court in the above-quoted case were outrightly violated, and the human rights of the deceased victim were infringed. The department also accepted the negligence, and ADG, Prisons, suspended a jail warden in this regard. In these circumstances, the Commission directs to issue a notice under sec.-18 of the PHR Act, 1993, to the Chief Secretary, Government of Uttar Pradesh, as to why the Commission should not grant monetary compensation of Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) to the NOK of the deceased prisoner Babu Ram Pradhan.
Response within six weeks.
- This is for your information and further necessary action.
Yours faithfully,
Sd/-
K.K. Shrivastava
Deputy Registrar (Law)
M-5 Section
Ph. No. 011-24663291
Email: ar5.nhrc@nic.in
Chained Injustice: The Case of Babu Ram Pradhan and the Upholding of Human Rights by pvchr.india9214 on Scribd
Chained Injustice: The Case of Babu Ram Pradhan and the Upholding of Human Rights by pvchr.india9214 on Scribd
Chained Injustice: The Case of Babu Ram Pradhan and the Upholding of Human Rights by pvchr.india9214 on Scribd
