New Delhi (PTI): "Right to live with dignity extends even to incarcerated" and its denial to the prisoners is a "relic of the colonizers and pre-colonial mechanisms," the Supreme Court has said.
The observations were made by a bench comprising Chief Chief Justice D Y Chandrachud and Justices J B Pardiwala and Manoj Misra in a landmark judgement delivered on Thursday by which it banned caste-based discrimination like division of manual labour, segregation of barracks, and bias against prisoners of denotified tribes and habitual offenders.
It held as unconstitutional the certain objectionable prison manual rules of 10 states including Uttar Pradesh, West Bengal, Madhya Pradesh, Andhra Pradesh, Odisha, Kerala, Maharashtra, Karnataka, and Himachal Pradesh.
The CJI, penning the 148-page judgement for the bench, dealt with fundamental rights under Articles 14 (equality), 15 (prohibition of discrimination), 17 (abolition of untouchability), 21 (right to life and personal liberty), and 23 (right against forced labour) of the Constitution.
Dealing with Article under 21, it said, "The right to live with dignity extends even to the incarcerated. Not providing dignity to prisoners is a relic of the colonizers and pre-colonial mechanisms, where oppressive systems were designed to dehumanize and degrade those under the control of the State.
"Authoritarian regimes of the pre-constitutional era saw prisons not only as places of confinement but as tools of domination. This Court, focusing on the changed legal framework brought out by the Constitution, has recognized that even prisoners are entitled to the right to dignity."
On Article 14, it said the state shall not deny to any person equality before the law or the equal protection of the laws within the territory of India and equality is a crucial aspect of the constitutional vision.
"The constitutional standards laid down by the Court under Article 14 can be summarized as follows. First, the Constitution permits classification if there is intelligible differentia and reasonable nexus with the object sought. Second, the classification test cannot be merely applied as a mathematical formula to reach a conclusion...," it said.
The judgment then dealt with Article 15 which prohibits discrimination on grounds of caste, race, religion, language etc.
"If the State itself discriminates against a citizen under any of the mentioned grounds, then it is discrimination of the highest form. After all, the State is expected to prevent discrimination, not perpetuate it. That is why our Constitution prohibits the State from discriminating against any citizen," it said.
Discrimination is prohibited, because it has several repercussions on human lives and it arises due to a feeling of superiority or inferiority, bias, contempt, or hatred against a person or a group, it said.
"In history, such feelings have led to the genocide of certain communities. Discrimination also lowers the self-esteem of the person being discriminated against. It can lead to unfair denial of opportunities and constant violence against a set of people. Discrimination can also be done by continuously ridiculing or humiliating someone, who is on the weaker side of the social spectrum. It can cause trauma to a person with which they may be affected their entire life.
"Discrimination also includes stigmatizing the identity or existence of a marginalized social group. Discrimination can also happen based on certain stereotypes against a marginalized group. As a society that divided people into a hierarchy, we must remain conscious of the forms and kinds of discrimination against marginalized groups.
"Discriminatory laws enacted before the Constitution of India came into force need to be scrutinized and done away with," the CJI said.
Dealing with Article 17 which bans untouchability, it said it is abolished and its practice in any form is forbidden.
The enforcement of any disability arising out of "untouchability" shall be an offence punishable in accordance with law and this provision has a special place in the Constitution as it puts an end to the socially discriminatory practice, the bench said.
"Article 17 enunciates that everyone is born equal. There cannot be any stigma attached to the existence, touch or presence of any person. By way of Article 17, our Constitution strengthens the equality of status of every citizen...," it said.
"It has been held that the right to life enshrined in Article 21 'cannot be restricted to mere animal existence' and 'means something much more than just physical survival'," it said.
It includes the right to live with dignity and in fact, dignity forms a part of the basic structure of the Constitution, it said. "In that sense, human dignity is a constitutional value and a constitutional goal."
The bench added, "Human dignity is intrinsic to and inseparable from human existence. Implicit in this right under Article 21 is 'the right to protection against torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment'."
It then remarked on Article 23 which deals with the prohibition of forced labour and human trafficking and said that by allowing such prison rules the states are becoming part of the offence.
It gave instances of caste-based discriminations in prisons, such as viewing as cruelty forcing a man of 'higher caste' to work at any trade would 'disgrace him' and his family.
Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.
Bengaluru (PTI): Karnataka Deputy Chief Minister D K Shivakumar on Wednesday rubbished allegations that the IPL final venue was shifted from Bengaluru to Ahmedabad due to the distribution of tickets to MLAs.
Speaking to reporters, Shivakumar said the reason for the shift could be the availability of a larger stadium in Ahmedabad.
“Ahmedabad has a large stadium and can accommodate more spectators. That must be the reason the IPL final was shifted there. There is no connection between ticket distribution to MLAs and the venue change,” he said.
When asked about reports linking the venue shift to MLAs demanding tickets, he quipped, “In some places, 50 per cent of tickets are reserved.”
When reporters said the BCCI had indicated that the decision was linked to ticket issues, he responded, “Let them make such statements. I will respond appropriately.”
Bengaluru was originally expected to host the final as the Royal Challengers Bengaluru were the defending champions.
Ahmedabad will host the IPL final for a second successive season on May 31, the BCCI announced earlier in the day, while allotting Qualifier 1 to Dharamsala and two other playoff games to New Chandigarh.
The board, however, said the final venue was shifted “owing to certain requirements from the local association and authorities that were beyond the scope of BCCI’s established guidelines and protocols.”
Shivakumar declined to comment on the revocation of the suspension of Muslim leaders in Davanagere, saying it was a party decision.
Regarding the removal of MLC Naseer Ahmed as CM Siddaramaiah’s political secretary, he said the chief minister had already spoken on the matter.
“The CM has his own information. Party office-bearers have provided guidance. He was given certain responsibilities, which he did not handle properly, which is why he was removed,” Shivakumar said.
On MLC Abdul Jabbar, who resigned as the state Congress minority cell chief and was later expelled from the party, he said Jabbar had submitted his resignation, which the party accepted.
The Congress in Karnataka faced internal dissent in April when several Muslim leaders objected to the party fielding Samarth Shamanur as its candidate for the recently held Davanagere South Assembly bypoll.
They demanded that a Muslim candidate be fielded, citing the constituency’s substantial Muslim population. The party subsequently took disciplinary action against three leaders, including Jabbar and MLC Ahmed.
When asked about his and the CM’s visit to Delhi, he said, “We will go when the high command calls us. It is not appropriate to go without being called.”
On Congress supporting TVK in Tamil Nadu, Shivakumar said the decision was taken to keep the "BJP out of power and strengthen secular forces." Elections to the 234 Assembly constituencies were held on April 23, and the results were announced on May 4.
The Congress party, a long-time ally of the DMK, announced its support for TVK to form a government in Tamil Nadu and severed ties with the Dravidian major.
The incumbent DMK was trounced by the fledgling Tamilaga Vettri Kazhagam, led by Vijay, who secured 108 seats. “Despite pressure from the AIADMK and BJP, TVK did not align with them. Our party has taken this decision in the interest of secular forces and the welfare of Tamil Nadu,” Shivakumar said.
