RIGHTS OF UNDER TRIAL PRISONERS A CRITICAL STUDY

ASSIGNMENT SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL

FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENT
FOR FIRST SEMESTER OF LLM.

“RIGHTS OF UNDER TRIAL PRISONERS A

CRITICAL STUDY”

SUBMITTED BY: - SUBMITTED TO: -

CHIRANJEEV ROUTRAY MRS. HIRANMAYEE MISHRA

1ST SEMESTER L.L.M HOD (PG DEPT. OF LAW)

ROLL NO-23 MADHUSUDAN LAW UNIVERSITY

1
Page

Madhusudan Law university, Cuttack

 RIGHTS OF UNDER TRIAL PRISONERS A CRITICAL STUDY

DECLARATION

I CHIRANJEEV ROUTRAY student of 1st semester LLM, Madhusudan Law University,

Cuttack do hereby declare that , have done this Assignment on “RIGHTS OF UNDER TRIAL
PRISONERS A CRITICAL STUDY” as an academic curriculum in the partial fulfilment of
LLM , under the guidance of MRS. HIRANMAYEE MISHRA. The assignment is an original
work undertaken by me. I have not violated the copyright of other author’s authority for
academic purpose.

DATE SIGNATURE OF STUDENT

Page

Madhusudan Law university, Cuttack

 RIGHTS OF UNDER TRIAL PRISONERS A CRITICAL STUDY

GUIDE CERTIFICATE

This is to certify that the Assignment paper entitled “RIGHTS OF UNDER TRIAL
PRISONERS A CRITICAL STUDY ” which is being submitted by CHIRANJEEV
ROUTRAY for the partial fulfillment of requirements of 1st Semester, LLM ,Madhusudan Law
university, Cuttack, is a record of Bonafide and independent research work carried out by him
under my supervision and guidance. I considered that the assignment has reached the standards
fulfilling the requirements of the rules and regulations relating to the nature of the degree.

3
Page

DATE SIGNATURE OF GUIDE

Madhusudan Law university, Cuttack

 RIGHTS OF UNDER TRIAL PRISONERS A CRITICAL STUDY

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

I take this opportunity to express my gratitude to the people who have been instrumental in the
successful completion of this assignment. I owe great thanks, to many people who have helped
and supported me throughout the making of this project work. I would like to convey my greatest
appreciation to MRS. HIRANMAYEE MISHRA, HOD PG dept of Law, Madhusudan Law
University, Cuttack.

I won’t say thank you is enough for her tremendous help and support. My deepest gratitude to
PROF. (DR) KAMAL JEET SINGH, Vice Chancellor, Madhusudan Law University, Cuttack
for guiding and correcting whenever required. I would also like to thank.

Other faculties of Madhusudan Law University, Cuttack helped me by giving all the required
information. I will be failing in my duties if I do not extend my heartfelt thanks to my family and
well-wishers.

Above all, my special appreciation goes to the almighty God for the divine intervention in the
academic endeavor.

DATE SIGNATURE OF STUDENT

4
Page

Madhusudan Law university, Cuttack

 RIGHTS OF UNDER TRIAL PRISONERS A CRITICAL STUDY

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ABSTRACT

SL.NO CHAPTER TITLE PAGE

NO
1 I INTRODUCTION 7-10

2 II THE RIGHTS OF UNDERTRIAL 11-14

3 III ROLE OF SUPREME COURT ON 15-21

RIGHTS OF PRISONERS IN INDIA
4 IV UNDERTRIALS AND THEIR RELEASE: 22-24
EXPLORING THE LEGAL
DISPENSATION
5 V CURRENT EVENTS 25-28

6 VI CONCLUSION 29

BIBLIOGRAPHY

5
Page

Madhusudan Law university, Cuttack

 RIGHTS OF UNDER TRIAL PRISONERS A CRITICAL STUDY

ABSTRACT

Undertrial prisoners in India are individuals who are awaiting trial or judgment in a court of law.
They have been charged with an offense, but their guilt or innocence has not yet been
established. While they are still technically presumed innocent until proven guilty, undertrial
prisoners often face a host of challenges related to their legal status. This critical study will
explore the rights of undertrial prisoners in India and the ways in which these rights are often
violated. The first right of undertrial prisoners in India is the right to a fair and speedy trial.
However, this right is often not realized in practice. Undertrial prisoners in India often spend
years in jail awaiting trial, due to a variety of factors such as court delays, overburdened legal
systems, and lack of access to legal aid. In some cases, undertrial prisoners may even be held for
longer than the maximum sentence for the crime they are accused of. Another key right of
undertrial prisoners is the right to legal representation. This includes the right to a lawyer of their
choice and the right to legal aid if they cannot afford a lawyer. Unfortunately, these rights are
often denied to undertrial prisoners in India, particularly those from marginalized communities.
As a result, many undertrial prisoners are left without proper legal representation, which can lead
to unfair trials and wrongful convictions. Undertrial prisoners also have the right to humane
treatment and adequate living conditions while in jail. However, in India, many undertrial
prisoners are subjected to inhumane conditions, including overcrowding, poor sanitation, and
lack of medical care. This can lead to physical and mental health issues and violates the basic
human rights of prisoners. Additionally, undertrial prisoners have the right to be protected from
violence and abuse while in custody. Unfortunately, instances of police brutality and
mistreatment of undertrial prisoners are not uncommon in India. In some cases, undertrial
prisoners have reported being beaten, tortured, or subjected to other forms of abuse while in
police custody. The rights of undertrial prisoners in India are essential to ensure justice and
fairness in the legal system. Unfortunately, these rights are often violated in practice, leading to
significant challenges for undertrial prisoners. It is important to address these issues and work
towards a legal system that upholds the rights of all individuals, regardless of their legal status.
This can be achieved through better legal aid, improved living conditions, and increased
accountability for police and other authorities who mistreat under trial prisoners.
6
Page

Madhusudan Law university, Cuttack

 RIGHTS OF UNDER TRIAL PRISONERS A CRITICAL STUDY

CHAPTER-I

INTRODUCTION

According to the Prison Statistics India 2021, a report published by the Ministry of Home Affairs
(2016-2021), the numbers of convicts in jails have decreased by 9.5 per cent whereas the number
of undertrial inmates has increased by 45.8 per cent. With three out of four prisoners being
undertrials, the problem of overcrowding of prisons is essentially an undertrial issue. As of
December 31, 2021, around 80 per cent of prisoners were confined for periods up to a year. The
report states that an overwhelming 95 per cent of undertrials released in 2021 were granted bail
by courts while a mere 1.6 per cent were released on acquittal by court. It shows that the sluggish
pace at which trial courts work to reach a final decision cannot keep up with the increasing
number of undertrials. All Human beings are entitled to some basic human rights by virtue of
being as a member of human family. Prisoners are human being and as such they retain their
rights even when in prison. This is so because human rights are universal. This means that every
person, including a prisoner, has human rights, no matter who he is, where he or she lives or his
or her class, race, sex, age, social status, etc. Also, human rights are said to be inalienable. This
means that they cannot be taken away from a person, including a prisoner. Trials awaiting
prisoners or people who have been sentenced lose some of their rights, such as freedom of
movement, but they keep other rights such as the right to dignity. The right to human dignity, the
right life, right to equality and freedom from discrimination, the right not be tortured or treated
cruelly or inhumanely, This means that a prisoner retains his human dignity in all circumstances.
His right to human dignity is unbreakable in all circumstances irrespective of the type of crime
he committed. He may also not be tortured or treated cruelly or inhumanely under any
circumstances. Universal Declaration of Human Rights which states that: “No one shall be
subject to torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment of punishment” the United Nations
Covenant on Civil and Political Rights which states in part: “All persons deprived of their liberty
shall be treated with humanity and with respect for the inherent dignity of the human person”.
According to the Article 25 of Universal Declaration of Human Rights “All Human beings are
said to be born free and equal in dignity”. Human rights are also available to persons under
7

detention including convicted or under trial prisoners. Article 21 of the Constitution of India,
Page

Madhusudan Law university, Cuttack

 RIGHTS OF UNDER TRIAL PRISONERS A CRITICAL STUDY
recognizes that the right to life includes a right to live with human dignity and not mere animal
existence. Thus, a prison atmosphere can be accepted as civilized only if it recognizes the basic
human rights and the constitutional rights of the prisoners and makes efforts for the effective and
meaningful enjoyment of the same by means of prison reforms. But unfortunately even now our
prisons are crowded with under trial prisoners. Many of them are innocent persons who are
caught in the trap of the law eagerly waiting for their trial date and several of them are prepared
to confess their crime and accept their sentence. When we think about prisons the image that
comes to our mind is that of hard core criminals who were imprisoned for committing crimes.
But in actual fact 64.7% of prisoners in Indian jails are under trials that may or may not be
punished. Thousands of them, arrested on suspicion of committing petty crimes, fade away in
jails for a much longer period than the maximum punishment under the law for the crime which
they have committed. The presence of higher number of under trials in the prison results in their
overcrowding, which in turn causes many socio economic problems in the society.1The need for
prison reforms has come into focus during the last few decades. The Supreme Court and the
High Courts have commented upon the shocking conditions prevailing inside the prisons,
resulting in violation of prisoner’s rights. The problem of prison administration has been
examined by numerous expert bodies set up by the Government of India. The most
comprehensive examination was done by the All India Jail Reforms Committee of 1980-83,
popularly known as the Mulla Committee. The National and the State Human Rights
Commission have also, in their annual reports, drawn attention to the terrible conditions in the
prisons and urged governments to introduce reforms. The presence of large number of under trial
prisoners and their continuing stay for longer period definitely indicates the slow rate of trials
which will leads to the overcrowding of our prisons. In the views of National Human Rights
Commissions, unnecessary and unjustified arrests made by the police and the slow judicial
processes causing congestion of under trial prisoners are the main causes of overcrowding in
jails.

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

For the purpose of this research, the methodology used information gathered mostly from
secondary sources of data collection, most notably government websites, previously conducted
surveys, reports by major think tanks and scholarly articles. The contextualization of the issue at
8
Page

1
Dr. Bindu M.Nambiar Volume : 2 | Issue : 9 | Sept 2013 ISSN - 2250-1991

Madhusudan Law university, Cuttack

 RIGHTS OF UNDER TRIAL PRISONERS A CRITICAL STUDY
hand has been accomplished by pursuing a general overview of the Rights available to Prisoners
in India and thereafter examing how far the administrative, legislative and judicial structures
have been able to safeguard these rights and liberties guaranteed to them. In order to broaden the
contours of their analysis, a broad-based perspective has been drawn, integrating within the
analysis the situation of a cohort of intersectional communities/categories of prisoners- women,
caste/class-based, etc. Issues are presented in this section so that the complexity of the case can
be understood by readers. This complexity is also built by referring to other related research
strands and also researchers’ interpretations of them. Thus, the research methodology adopted
herein is descriptive and inductive aiming to reach generalised results which identify the
problem, followed by a thorough and rich description of the context or setting, description of
multiple intersectional ties, and past understanding. Finally, in light of qualitative and
quantitative evidence and with the help of the case study method, outcomes of the inquiry are
presented in the form of lessons learned and recommendations prescribed for a solution-oriented
approach.

REVIEW OF LITERATURE

Lots of literature is available on rights of prisoners. Books are also available for the protection
of rights of under trials. The literature on constitutional laws, human rights, books on Legal
Services Authorities Act. The Criminal Procedure code and other laws provide provisions for
rights of prisoners including under trial prisoners. The reports published by govt. of different
committees established for tackle problems of prisoners are also available. The statistical data
given by National Crime records Bureau gives incite of this problem.

MEANING OF UNDERTRIAL

The term ‘Under-trial’ denotes an unconvicted prisoner i.e. one who has been detained in prison
during the period of investigation, inquiry or trial for the offence he/she is accused to have
committed. The 78th Report of the Law Commission of India (1979) defines ‘undertrial’ as a
person who is in judicial custody or remand during investigation. An undertrial or a pre-trial
detainee denotes an unconvicted prisoner, i.e., one who has been detained in prison during the
period of investigation, inquiry or trial for the offence they are accused to have committed.For a
long time, provisions governing undertrial prisoners were determined under the 1898 colonial
9

law. The change happened in 1973 when the Indian Parliament enacted the Code of Criminal
Page

Madhusudan Law university, Cuttack

 RIGHTS OF UNDER TRIAL PRISONERS A CRITICAL STUDY
Procedure (CrPC) for administration of substantive criminal law in the country. Section 436
of the Act dealt with the issues concerning undertrials, including the maximum period for which
undertrial prisoners can be detained in police custody. With the numbers of undertrial prisoners
rising to alarming levels, the government amended the said legislation by adding Section 436A,
which stated that should an accused be detained for more than half the maximum period
of imprisonment associated with the crime, he/she has the right to be released on the presentation
of a personal bond. The most recent addition to the list of provisions for undertrials is the SC's
2014 directive in Bhim Singh v. Union of India2 According to The ‘Prison Statistics India 2015’
report, which was released by the National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB) in October 2016,
Sixty-seven percent two-third of the people in Indian jails are undertrials which amounts to over
200,000 under-trial prisoners. The National Crime Records Bureau of the Government of India
has reported that thousands of under-trials had been incarcerated for a period of five years or
more. Undertrial means a situation where the accused is facing a criminal trial but is not released
on bail (in prison) and law requires that such accused should get the speedy trial.

RESEARCH OBJECTIVE

1. This critical study will explore the rights of undertrial prisoners in India and the ways in
which these rights are often violated.
2. To study and analyze present position of implementation of these rights.
3. To make an analysis of right to free legal aid of under trail prisoners.
4. To illustrate grounds of restrictions on the implementation of abovementioned rights.
5. To review the scope of legislature to enact a law for providing the right to free legal aid
to under trial prisoners.

RESEARCH QUESTION

1. Are jails overcrowded?

2. Are prisoners getting the basic rights?
3. Is there a lack of will of authorities to implement the right to free legal aid?
4. Is there a need to make drastic legislation to implement the rights?
10
Page

2
W.P. (Criminal) No. 310/2005

Madhusudan Law university, Cuttack

 RIGHTS OF UNDER TRIAL PRISONERS A CRITICAL STUDY
CHAPTER-II

THE RIGHTS OF UNDERTRIAL

There are some rights which are enjoyed by an undertrial during investigation, inquiry and trial
which are necessary for him to seek justice. Following are the Rights of Undertrials.

Right to Fundamental Rights

Fundamental rights which are provided by par-III of the Indian Constitution are the first and the
foremost rights which are enjoyed by the Undertrials during the trials. The most important
among which is Article-14 i.e. Equality before Law, which reads as ‘the state shall not deny to
any person equality before the law or the equal protection of laws within the territory of India.

Right to life and personal liberty

This right is provided by Article 21 of the Constitution of India which reads as “No person shall
be deprived of his life and personal liberty except according to the procedure established by
law”.

Right to live with human dignity

In new dimension of Article 21, the Hon’ble Supreme Court held that “right to live” does not
mean mere confinement to physical existence but it includeswithin its ambit the right to live with
human dignity.3

Right to Know the Grounds of Arrest

Article 22 (1) of the Constitution provides that a person arrested for an offence under ordinary
law be informed as soon as may be the grounds of arrest. In addition to the constitutional
provision, Section 50 of Criminal Procedure Code also provides for the same.

Right to Consult a Legal Practitioner

It is one of the fundamental rights enshrined in our Constitution. Article 22 (1) of the
Constitution provides, that no person who is arrested shall be denied the right to consult and to
11

be defended by a legal practitioner of his choice. The right of the accused to have a counsel of
Page

3
Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India, AIR 1978 SC 597

Madhusudan Law university, Cuttack

 RIGHTS OF UNDER TRIAL PRISONERS A CRITICAL STUDY
his choice is fundamental and essential to fair trial. The right is recognized because of the
obvious fact that ordinarily an accused person does not have the knowledge of law and the
professional skill to defend him before a court of law wherein the prosecution is conducted by a
competent and experienced prosecutor. This also includes right to free legal aid provided by
Article 39A of The Constitution of India.

Right to be examined by a Medical Practitioner

Another important right which is enjoyed by an undertrial is examination of arrested person by

medical officer. This right is provided by section 54 of The Code of Criminal Procedure,1973.

Right to Bail

Another important right enjoyed by the undertrial is right to bail which is provided by section
436 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. Bail means “to set at liberty a person arrested or
imprisoned, on security being taken for his appearance on a day at a place certain because the
party arrested of imprisoned is delivered in to the hands of those who laid themselves or become
bail for his due appearance when required, in order that he may be safely protected from prison.”

Right to Speedy Trial

Justice delayed is justice denied. This is all the more true in a criminal trial where the accused is
not released on bail during the pendency of the trial and trial is inordinately delayed. However,
the code does not in so many words confer any such right on the accused to have his case
decided expeditiously. Section 437(6) of Criminal Procedure Code provides that if the accused is
in detention and the trial is not completed within 60 days from the first date fixed for hearing he
shall be released on bail. But this only mitigates the hardship of the accused person but does not
give him speedy trial and secondly this rule is applicable only in case of proceedings before a
Magistrate.

RIGHTS PROVIDED BY ARTICLE 20 THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA.

Protection against ex post facto law

Clause (1) of Article 20 of the Indian Constitution says that “no person shall be convicted of any
12

offence except for violation of a law in force at the time of the commission of the act charged as
Page

an offence, nor be subjected to a penalty greater than that which might have been inflicted under

Madhusudan Law university, Cuttack

 RIGHTS OF UNDER TRIAL PRISONERS A CRITICAL STUDY
the law in force at the time of the commission of the offence.” Doctrine of “autrefois acquit” and
“autrefois convict” According to this doctrine, if a person is tried and acquitted or convicted of
an offence, he cannot be tried again for the same offence or on the same facts for any other
offence. This doctrine has been substantially incorporated in the Article 20(2) of the Constitution
and is also embodied in Section 300 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973.

Prohibition against self-incrimination

Clause (3) of Article 20 provides that no person accused of any offence shall be compelled to be
a witness against himself. Thus Article 20(3) embodies the general principles of English and
American jurisprudence that no one shall be compelled to give testimony which may expose him
to prosecution for crime.

Compensation for wrongful arrest

Section 358 Criminal Procedure Code empowers the court to order a person to pay compensation
to another person for causing a police officer to arrest such other person wrongfully. Usually it is
the police officer who investigates and makes the arrest and the complainant, if at all can be
considered to have a nexus with the arrest, it is rather indirect or remote.

The Right of Appeal

This right is enjoyed by the undertrial if the conclusion of trial leads him towards the conviction.
Provisions relating to appeal have been provided under Section 378-392 of the Code of Criminal
Procedure, 1973. Right to appeal is the statutory right of a person and the inherent right.

Right to Fair Trial

The fair trial is the foremost requirement of criminal proceedings and it is utmost right of an
undertrial. Fair Trial is the main object of criminal procedure and such fairness should not be
hampered and threatened in any manner. Fair Trial entails the interests of the accused, the victim
and of the society. Thus, fair trial must be accorded to every accused in the spirit of right to life
and personal liberty and the accused must get a free and fair, just and reasonable trial on the
charge imputed in a criminal case.
13

Right to security of life inside the jail

Page

Madhusudan Law university, Cuttack

 RIGHTS OF UNDER TRIAL PRISONERS A CRITICAL STUDY
It is the duty of the State to provide security to undertrial. If it fails and any incident takes place
in jail, then the Government has to pay compensation to the dependents of the deceased person.

Right to have the benefit of the presumption of innocence till guilt is proved beyond
reasonable doubt

The above provision has been defined under section 101-105 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872.
In an accusatory system, such as that prevailing in India, it is for the prosecution to prove beyond
reasonable doubt that the accused committed the offence; it is not for the Court to speculate as to
how the crime has been committed.

Right to be tried by an independent and impartial Judge

The Scheme of Separate of Judiciary as envisaged in Cr.P.C., also Sees. 479, 327, 191, etc. of
Cr.P.C.). No Judge can act in any matter in which he has any pecuniary interest nor where he has
an interest though not a pecuniary one suffience to create a real biasness.

Right to be heard about the sentence upon conviction

The most important right of the accused is that he should be heard about the Sentence upon
conviction.

14
Page

Madhusudan Law university, Cuttack

 RIGHTS OF UNDER TRIAL PRISONERS A CRITICAL STUDY

CHAPTER-III
ROLE OF SUPREME COURT ON RIGHTS OF PRISONERS IN INDIA
On occasions, issues concerning prisoners in general and the plight of undertrials in particular,
have received serious attention from the state. Much of the positive contribution has come
through judicial intervention. Through judgments and strictures to authorities managing
the criminal justice system, the country's higher judiciary has sought to improve the welfare
of India's prisoners, especially the undertrials4. The serious judicial intervention on the issues
of undertrials began as early as 1979 when the plight of undertrial prisoners was written about by
the venerable English daily, The Indian Express. The paper carried a series of reports on the
horrendous conditions of thousands of prisoners spending years in prison without being even
brought to trial. As a direct result, the issue received some serious, albeit judicial, consideration.
The report led to the filing of a writ petition through a lawyer activist in the Supreme
Court. 5 The Court subsequently admitted the petition and it was only in 1979, in the
judgment of Hussainara Khatoon6 that the Supreme Court of India delivered an important
verdict: speedy trial was a fundamental, constitutional right for criminal defendants. The
Supreme Court observed:
“An alarmingly large number of men and women, including children are behind prison bars for
years awaiting trial in courts of law. The offences with which some of them are charged are
trivial, which, even if proved, would not warrant punishment for more than a few months,
perhaps for a year or two, and yet these unfortunate forgotten specimens of humanity are in jail,
deprived of their freedom, for periods ranging from three to ten years without even as much as
their trial having commenced. It is a crying shame on the judicial system which permits
incarceration of men and women for such long periods of time without trial.”
The role of Supreme Court in the past few years in introducing jail reforms has been admirable.
Supreme Court in its various judgments tries to protect the rights and freedoms of citizens of

4
The judiciary took up the issues of undertrials on numerous occasions cases such
a s Bhagalpur Blindings, Hussainara Khatoon, Mantoo Mazumdar, Rudal Shah among other.
5
A L a w y e r K a p i l a H i g o r a n i w a s s o s h o c k e d t o r e a d The Indian Express article that she
appealed before the Supreme Courtfor a Writ of Habeas Corpus in 1979.
15

6
Hussainara Khatoon v. State of Bihar, (1980) 1 SCC 98.
Page

Madhusudan Law university, Cuttack

 RIGHTS OF UNDER TRIAL PRISONERS A CRITICAL STUDY
India including rights and freedoms of prisoners. Supreme Court while extending the horizons of
constitutional rights has given wide interpretation to constitutional provisions. The Supreme
Court of India has been active in responding human rights of prisoners. They have given
different category of rights to the prisoners during detention which are specifically recognized
under Indian laws as well as under principles of international covenants. Following are some of
the assumptions based upon which Supreme Court has given these basic rights even to the
prisoners. .
 Overcrowded prisons, prolonged detention of under trial prisoners, unsatisfactory living
condition and allegations of indifferent and even inhuman behavior by prison staff has
repeatedly attracted the attention of critics over the years. Some of the relevant cases
interpreting the rights of prisoners are as follows.
o Right to Protection of life and liberty – Article 21 is the heart and soul of Indian
constitution, it provides basic human right that “No person shall be denied right to
life and personal liberty, except procedure established by the law”. Article 21
provides for right to life and liberty to every person either citizen or non citizen,
this right can be taken away only with the procedure established by the law.
Supreme Court has developed human rights jurisprudence for the protection and
preservation of rights of prisoners through interpretation of Article 21. Supreme
Court in its various judgments specified that prisoners being a human being
cannot be denied of basic human rights. Right to life and liberty in a limited space
is available even to prisoners. It can be taken away only with the procedure
established by the law. In case of Maneka Gandhi v/s Union of India7 Supreme
Court mentioned that denial of Article 21 can be justifying only accordance with
the procedure established by the law. The Apex court opened new dimensions to
Article 21 and led down that, the procedure cannot be arbitrary, unfair or
unreasonable it must be just fair and reasonable. The trial with all reasonable
aspects of fair trial including right to be heard, right to appoint legal practitioner
of his own choice, independent and impartial judiciary, right to legal aid, right to
speedy trial, etc. In another case of Fancis Coralie Mullin v/s The Administrator8
16
Page

7
AIR 1978 SC 597
8
AIR 1981 SC 746

Madhusudan Law university, Cuttack

 RIGHTS OF UNDER TRIAL PRISONERS A CRITICAL STUDY
Supreme Court held that the procedure must be just fair and reasonable and not
arbitrary whimsical or fanciful.
o 2. Right to speedy trial – Justice delayed said to be justice denied, a prolonged
justice cannot be considered to be a valid justice, so the right to speedy trial is
essential for proper justice. It is responsibility of state to ensure speedy justice to
the trial awaiting prisoners. Article 21 of India constitution provides for right to
life and liberty which can be taken away with procedure established by the law.
The procedure provided under Article 21 must be just, fair & reasonable
procedure. Right to speedy trial is the basic ingredient of just, fair & reasonable
trial. Section 309 of criminal procedure court provides for speedy trial its states
that as soon as the hearing starts the court has to conduct the proceeding day
today. The criminal judicial system in India is based on the assumption of
presumption of innocence. The court is under mandate to take the cognizance of
accusation and conclude the trial expeditiously so as to protect the assumption of
innocence without causing undue harassment and prejudice to under trial
prisoners. It is absolutely necessary that the offence should be expeditiously trial
so that in case of rejection of bail the accused person does not remain in jail more
than the necessary period. In case of A.R. Antulay v/s R.S. Nayak9 court held that
right to speedy trial is a basic part of right to life and liberty provided under
Article 21 of constitution and are available to accused in all stages of proceeding
including investigation, inquiry, trial, appeal or revision. In landmark judgment of
Maneka Gandhi’s case Supreme Court expressed right to speedy trial as a
fundamental right further enforcement of right to life and personal liberty
expressed under Article 21 of Indian Constitution. However in another case
Hussainara Khatoon v/s State of Bihar10 Supreme Court considered the problem
of speedy trial court observed that there can be little doubt after the dynamic
interpretations placed by this court on Article 21 in Maneka Gandhi vs. Union of
India that a procedure which keeps such large number, of people behind bars
without trial so long cannot possibly be regarded as reasonable, just or fair so as
to be in conflict with the requirement of the Article." In this case a news
17
Page

9
AIR 1988 SC 1531
10
(1980) 1 SCC 91.

Madhusudan Law university, Cuttack

RIGHTS OF UNDER TRIAL PRISONERS A CRITICAL STUDY

expressed in Indian express stating about the position of under trial prisoners in
Bihar jail expressed that some of the under trials had spent more time in jails
exceeding their maximum punishment for that offence, a large number of men
and women including children behind the prison bars for years awaiting for trial
in court of law. Most of them are arrested and detained for petty or trivial matters
which even though proved would not attract punishment more than one or two
years. Some of them had also not produce before the court for consideration. In
this case Supreme Court while issuing writ of Habeas Corpus for under-trials
stated that; "The information contained in these newspaper cuttings is most
distressing and it is sufficient to stir the conscience and disturb the equanimity of
any socially motivated lawyer or judge. Some of the under trial prisoners whose
names are given in the newspaper cuttings have been in jail for as many as 5, 7, or
9 years and a few of them for even more than 10 years without their trial being
begun. What faith can these lost souls have in the judicial system which denies
them a bare trial for so many years and keeps them behind the bars not because
they are guilty; but because they are too poor to afford bail and the courts have no
time to try them. One reason why our legal and judicial system continually denies
justice to the poor by keeping them for long years in pretrial detention is our
highly unsatisfactory bail system. This system of bail operates very harshly
against the poor and it is only the non-poor who are able to take advantage of it by
getting them released on bail. The poor find it difficult to furnish bail even
without sureties because very often the amount of bail fixed by the courts is so
unrealistically excessive that in a majority of cases the poor are unable to satisfy
the police or the magistrate about their solvency for the amount of the bail and
where the bail is with sureties as is usually the case, it becomes an almost
impossible task for the poor to find persons sufficiently solvent to stand as
sureties”. In this case court held that “State cannot avoid its constitutional
obligation to provide speedy trial to the accused by pleading financial or
administrative inability. The State is under the Constitutional mandate to ensure
18

speedy trial and whatever is necessary for this purpose has to be done by the
State. It is also the Constitutional obligation of this Court as the guardian of the
Page

Madhusudan Law university, Cuttack

 RIGHTS OF UNDER TRIAL PRISONERS A CRITICAL STUDY

fundamental rights of the people, as a sentinel on the qui vie, to enforce the
fundamental right of the accused to speedy trial by issuing necessary directions to
the State which may include taking positive action, such as augmenting and
strengthening the investigative machinery, setting up new courts, building new
court houses, providing more staff and equipment to the courts, appointment of
additional judges and other measures calculated to ensure speedy trial. In case of
Mathew Areeparmtil and others v/s State of Bihar11 court has issued directions to
release the persons who are detailed in jail without trial. Court orders that the
cases in which tribal accused involve having punishment more than seven years
should be a released on execution of a personal bond. Where trials have been
started accused should be released on execution of personal bond. Where the
cases in which proceedings has not yet been started more than passing out three
years since lodging of FIR the accused should be released fourth with. In case of
Raj Deo Sharma v/s State of Bihar12 while considering the question of delay in
conduct of trial Supreme Court has issued following directions.
 In cases where the trial is for an offence punishable with imprisonment for
a period not exceeding seven years, whether the accused is in jail or not,
the court shall close the prosecution evidence on completion of a period of
two years from the date of recording the plea of the accused on the charges
framed whether the prosecution has examined all the witnesses or not,
within the said period and the court can proceed to the next step provided
by law for the trial of the case.
 In such cases as mentioned above, if the accused has been in jail for a
period of not less than one half of the maximum period of punishment
prescribed for the offence, the trial court shall release the accused on bail
forthwith on such conditions as it deems fit.
 If the offence under trial is punishable with imprisonment for a period
exceeding 7 years, whether the accused is in jail or not, the court shall
close the prosecution accused on the charge framed, whether the
19
Page

11
1985 SCC (2) 102
12
(1998) 7 SCC 507

Madhusudan Law university, Cuttack

 RIGHTS OF UNDER TRIAL PRISONERS A CRITICAL STUDY

prosecution has examined all the witnesses or not within the said period
and the court can proceed to the next step provided by law for the trial of
the case. In case of Shaheen Welfare Association v/s Union of India and
others13 court observe that if it is not practicable to release under trial
prisoner on bail in serious matters, right to speedy trial will meet the
requirement of Article 21 of Indian Constitution.
 Right to life liberty & freedoms – Right to proper classification of
prisoners on the basis of their age, sex, nature of case is essential for
preservation of their human rights. In case of Sunil Batra v/s Delhi
administration14 court held that, “the test of reasonableness provided under
article 19 and Article 21 of India constitution can be practiced by keeping
covets & under trial in separate jails. Solitary confinement is also said to
be violation of Article 21 as it denies the liberty to move, mix, mingle,
talk, Share Company with co-prisoners, unless it is backing of law.15
Solitary confinement in a general sense means segregation of prisoners
from other prisoners means the isolation of prisoners. Under Indian penal
code provisions has been incorporated for solitary confinement. It
provides that only the cases in which rigorous imprisonment can be
awarded the prisoner can be punished with solitary confinement. As per
rule if the offence is punishable more than six months maximum one
month solitary confinement can be awarded. If offence is punishable with
more than six months but less than one year maximum two months
solitary confinement can be awarded and if offence is punishable more
than one year maximum term of solitary confinement will be three
months. Solitary confinement exceeding three months can violation of
rules under Indian penal code. As per rule maximum fourteen days
imprisonment can be given at a time. There should be gap of same days
between two solitary confinements. If the offence is punishable with more
than three months the maximum days for awarding solitary confinement at
20

13
(1994)6 SCC 731
Page

14
1980 AIR 1579
15
Charles Sobhraj v/s State, 1996 Cri.L.J 3354

Madhusudan Law university, Cuttack

 RIGHTS OF UNDER TRIAL PRISONERS A CRITICAL STUDY

a time should not exceed more than seven days. However some of the
instance shows that grave violation of these provisions. Supreme Court
have showed its strong view against solitary confinement and held that
solitary confinement is highly degrading and dehumanizing effect on
prisoners. Court has taken view that it could be imposed only in
exceptional cases such as where the convict was of very dangerous
character and must be segregated from other prisonersRight to movement
or liberty can also be denied if bar-fetters would applied to the prisoners
unless it has authority of law.16
Rights of arrested person – Article 22 of Indian constitution to guarantees rights to arrested
person along with these rights Supreme Court also provided guidelines while arresting a person.
Those guidelines are as follows.
 Arrest are not be made in a routine manner. The officer making the arrest must be able to
justify its necessity on the basis of some preliminary investigation.
 An arrested person should be allowed to inform a friend or relative about the arrest and
where s/he is being held. The arresting officer must inform the arrested person when s/he
is brought to the police station and is required to make an entry in the diary as to whom
the information was given.
 It is the duty of the magistrate before whom the arrested person is produced to satisfy her
or him that the above requirements have been complied with.17 Article 22 of Indian
Constitution guarantees rights of arrested persons. These are the mandates to be followed
by police and prison authorities during arrest and detention. Supreme Court in a land
mark judgment of D.K. Basu v/s State of West Bengal18 has given different guidelines for
protecting human rights of accused.

21
Page

17
Joginder Kumar v/s State of UP and others AIR 1994 SC 1349
18
AIR 1997 SC 610

Madhusudan Law university, Cuttack

 RIGHTS OF UNDER TRIAL PRISONERS A CRITICAL STUDY
CHAPTER-IV

UNDERTRIALS AND THEIR RELEASE: EXPLORING THE LEGAL

DISPENSATION

An under-trial prisoner’s right against unnecessary detention and the procedure to secure his/her
release is given under the Cr.P.C.

A. Problem: Indiscriminate arrests The power of the police to arrest people is very wide and they
arrest people even when they cooperate with the investigation and are not likely to evade trial.
This results in unnecessary detentions.

Solution: Limiting the powers of arrest as proposed by the Code of Criminal Procedure
(Amendment) Bill 2006 passed by both the Houses of the Parliament in December 2008 and
awaiting the Presidential assent. The Code of Criminal Procedure (Amendment) Bill 2006
amends the existing provisions for arrest, i.e. section 41 (and also inserts section 41A into the
Cr.P.C). Section 41 limits the indiscriminate powers of arrest of police officers. A person cannot
be arrested merely because there is a complaint against her/him. It must a “credible”
complaint/information and the police officer must “have reason to believe” that “such person has
committed the said offence”.19 In cases involving an offence punishable with imprisonment up to
a maximum of seven years, the police officer can arrest a person only under certain specified
condition laid down in the law. The officer must record her/his reasons for arresting in writing.
In cases, where the specified conditions are not met, the police officer may, instead of arresting a
person, issue to her/him a notice of appearance.20 This requires the accused to appear before the
police officer when required and to cooperate with the police officer in the investigation of the
offence. This provision, if properly implemented, will lead to a vast reduction in the number of
persons – accused for offences punishable up to 7 years – who would have otherwise ended up
being detained in prison during the period of investigation, inquiry or trial of their offence.

B. Problem: Detention in bailable cases owing to poverty many poor people are detained in
prisons for alleged involvement in bailable offences primarily because they are unable to furnish
surety. This is a serious concern because in such cases bail is a matter of right and people end up
22

spending long periods in jail merely because they are poor.

Page

19
Section 41, Cr.P.C
20
Section 41 A, Cr.P.C

Madhusudan Law university, Cuttack

 RIGHTS OF UNDER TRIAL PRISONERS A CRITICAL STUDY

Solution: Amended section 436 Section 436 Cr.P.C., which deals with the right to bail in bailable
offences was amended in 2005.21 It mandates the police or court to release an indigent person on
personal bond without asking for any surety.22 The amendment allows an indigent person to
execute a bond that s/he shall appear before the court and stand trial. The section states that the
court shall consider any person who is unable to furnish bail within 7 days from the date of
her/his arrest as indigent.23 Therefore, a person accused for a bailable offence can be detained in
prison for a maximum period of 7 days.

C. Problem: Delay in investigation Many prisoners languish in prisons because the police do not
finish investigation, and file the chargesheet in time. This is a very serious matter because such
people remain in prisons without any inkling of a police case against them.

Solution: Section 167 Cr.P.C. lays down the maximum period within which the police
investigation must be completed and a chargesheet filed before the court. This period is 90 days
for offences punishable with death, life imprisonment or imprisonment for a term of not less than
ten years, and 60 days for all other offences. Where the investigation has not been completed
within the stipulated timeframe, it is mandatory upon the Magistrate to release the accused on
bail, provided he is ready to furnish bail. This provision shields the accused from suffering
incarceration on account of the inability of the investigating agency to wind up its investigation.

D. Problem: Delay in trial in certain cases many prisoners are charged with a non-bailable
offence which is not very serious and is triable by a Magistrate. They remain in prisons for long
period because of the delay in trial.

Solution: Use of section 437(6) in a case triable by a Magistrate, section 437(6) makes it
mandatory for a person to be released on bail where the trial has not concluded within 60 days
from the first date fixed for taking evidence. The magistrate may refuse such release, but only
after recording the reasons in writing.
23

21
The Code of Criminal Procedure (Amendment) Act 2005, Act 25 of 2005, w.e.f. June 23, 2006.
Page

22
Proviso to section 436 Cr.P.C
23
Explanation to the proviso to section 436 Cr.P.C

Madhusudan Law university, Cuttack

 RIGHTS OF UNDER TRIAL PRISONERS A CRITICAL STUDY
E. Problem: Prolonged detention Many under-trial prisoners are detained in prisons for long
periods, which in some cases extend beyond the maximum period of imprisonment prescribed
for the offence with which they are charged

Solution: Section 436A Cr.P.C.20 lays down the right of an undertrial to apply for bail once s/he
has served one half of the maximum term of sentence s/he would have served had s/he been
convicted. On a bail application filed under this section, the court shall hear the public prosecutor
and may order the

1) Release of such person on a personal bond with or without surety; or

2) Release of such person on bail instead of personal bond; or

3) Continued detention of such person.24 This section further proscribes the detention of an
undertrial beyond the maximum period of punishment prescribed for the offence that s/he is
alleged to have committed.25 Therefore, in effect, this section prescribes the maximum period an
undertrial can be detained in any case.

24

24
In cases pertaining to (2) and (3) the court is required to record reasons in writing
Page

25
This provision is not applicable to persons who are accused of an offence which attracts death sentence as one
of the punishments.

Madhusudan Law university, Cuttack

 RIGHTS OF UNDER TRIAL PRISONERS A CRITICAL STUDY

CHAPTER V

CURRENT EVENTS

President Draupadi Murmu’s call to the government and the judiciary to address the issue of
overcrowding of prisons is significant and a very welcome intervention. “I hear these days that
we will have to make new prisons because prisons are overcrowded. If we are moving towards
progress as a society, then why do we need new jails? We should be closing down existing
ones,” President Murmu said at the National Law Day celebrations organised by the Supreme
Court. “I am leaving this issue to the judges here and the law minister. I am not saying anything
more. I hope you understand what I have said and what I refrained from saying,” she added.

The Dickensian idea of building more prisons is not the solution, as President Murmu rightly
said. The Supreme Court recently asked the government to think “out of the box” and consider a
one-time measure to release prisoners in certain cases on the occasion of the 75th year of
Independence. While it is imperative for the top court to ensure that its liberal stance on bail
percolates to the trial courts, it is also disingenuous to characterize the undertrial crisis as a mere
bail issue. The real solution lies in tackling the cause, which is indiscriminate arrest of
individuals. From bringing special criminal legislations as populist measures to opposing bail as
part of a tougher stance on crime, there are several issues for the government to address.
Identifying those who cannot afford bail, even when available, is also crucial. The lawmakers too
must urgently respond to this crisis.

According to a PIB press release on 26 November, the President of India said, “Towards the end
of her speech, the President made impromptu observations about her own experience as the
governor of Jharkhand in addressing the problems of the growing number of undertrial prisoners
who were languishing in jails. She also recalled her days as a political activist in Odisha to
highlight that the excessive cost of litigation was a major impediment to the delivery of justice.
Appreciating instances of speedy delivery of justice, she urged the executive, judiciary, and
legislature to evolve an effective dispute resolution mechanism to mitigate the people’s plight.”
25

“In the end, the President summed up her speech by saying that the Supreme Court has earned a
Page

reputation for its superior standards and lofty ideals. It has played its role as the interpreter of the

Madhusudan Law university, Cuttack

 RIGHTS OF UNDER TRIAL PRISONERS A CRITICAL STUDY

Constitution in the most exemplary way. Landmark judgments passed by this Court have
strengthened the legal and constitutional framework of our nation. She said that the Supreme
Court Bench and the Bar are known for their legal scholarship. The Supreme Court has been
served by judges who have provided the intellectual depth, vigor and vitality necessary to create
a world-class institution. She expressed confidence that the Supreme Court would always remain
the sentinel of justice,” said the press release.

On 29 November, a bench of Justices Kaul and Abhay S. Oka ordered the jail staff to provide the
state governments with the information about these inmates so they can send it within 15 days to
the National Legal Service Authority. The court ruled that the jail administration must provide
information about undertrial detainees, including their names, the charges they are facing, the
date the bail order was issued, the conditions of the bail that were not met, and the amount of
time they have spent in custody since the bail order.

“At the inception, we flagged the issue of detenues/undertrial prisoners, who continue to be in
custody despite being granted bail but could not fulfill the bail conditions. Each jail authority of
the country must convey to their state government the details which will be forwarded to
NALSA for the formulation of a national level scheme to provide assistance to such prisoners,”
the bench said in its order.

Despite the internet, digitizing of all police stations and courts, the recourse to artificial
intelligence number crunching computers, the 2019 Prison Statistics India data gives the figures
of 2018. We will always be two years behind in information, as a default situation. In 2018,
therefore, we are told there were 1,350 prions, up from 1,339 the previous year. These 1,350
prions had a capacity of holding – for want of another term – 4, 03,739 human beings. But they
held 4, 78,600 persons, almost 20% more than their capacity. The big prisons in major towns of
the bigger states had actually a much higher density on inmates,” said Dayal.

“The more critical data is about undertrials, who have been jail sometimes for a decade, if not
more. Most of them are poor, Dalits or Muslims, far exceeding their presence in the general
26

national populations. There are 3, 30,487 undertrial persons in that total of 4, 78,600 inmates.
Page

The bureau said of the 4, 78, 125, there were total, the actual convicts numbered 1, 44,125, there

Madhusudan Law university, Cuttack

 RIGHTS OF UNDER TRIAL PRISONERS A CRITICAL STUDY

were 3, 30,487 undertrials, and 3,223 “detenus”, apart from 765 inmates who could not be
classified in any if the official categories. The situation of the Undertrial Prisoners merits
attention. The bureau admits that the number of undertrial prisoners has increased from 3, 23,537
in 2018 to 3,30,487 in 2019. An almost half of the persons re in district jails with about 36 % in
central prisons,” Dayal noted.

However, the number of detenus has increased from 2,384 in 2018 to 3,223 in 2019 a 35.19%
increase. Tamil Nadu has reported the maximum number of detenus (38.5%, 1,240) in the
country followed by Gujarat (21.7%, 698) and Jammu & Kashmir (12.5%, 404) at the end of
2019. I do not know I should describe it as official compassion or not, but there were 1,543
women prisoners with 1,779 children as on 31st December, 2019. Of these, 1,212 women were
undertrial prisoners who were accompanied by 1,409 children and 325 convicted prisoners who
were with 363 children. Some of these children may well have been born in jail.

Among 3, 30,487 undertrial prisoners, around 74.08 % of prisoners were confined for a period
up to 1 year (2, 44,841 prisoners), as on 31st December, 2019. There were 44,135 undertrial
prisoners (13.35% of total Undertrials) confined for 1 to 2 years. But 5,011 undertrial prisoners
(accounting for 1.52% of total undertrial prisoners) were confined for more than 5 years.

The grimmest data is on deaths and illness in prisons. Just in 2019, there were 1,845 deaths, most
described as “natural’, but as many as 165 were called “unnatural deaths term which admittedly
includes suicide, or murder. Among the 165 un-natural deaths of inmates, 116 inmates have
committed suicide, 20 inmates died in accidents, 10 inmates were murdered by inmates and 1
inmate died due to assault by outside elements during 2019. For a total of 66 inmate deaths,
cause of the death is yet to be known. Just as closing paragraph, 468 prisoners escaped captivity
but 231 caught again. And finally, as many as 20 jail breaks occurred during 2019.

According to The Hindu The Supreme Court has issued a slew of directions to ensure that
undertrial prisoners who have got bail, but are too poor to furnish surety and bail bonds, are
released within seven days. The court has even suggested granting “temporary bail” to undertrial
27

prisoners so that they can go out and arrange for bail bonds and sureties. The order by a Bench
Page

led by Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul came in the wake of a National Legal Services Authority

Madhusudan Law university, Cuttack

 RIGHTS OF UNDER TRIAL PRISONERS A CRITICAL STUDY
(NALSA) report in January that nearly 5,000 under trial prisoners were in jail in the country
despite courts granting them bail. They were either accused in multiple cases, or were simply too
impoverished to comply with the bail conditions. The amicus curiae, advocates Gaurav Agrawal,
said that 2,357 of these 5,000 prisoners were provided legal assistance and 1,417 were released,
but the fundamental violation of the right to personal liberty of prisoners continues. Digital
changes Mr. Agrawal said that meetings had been held with the Home Ministry, the NALSA and
the National Informatics Centre (NIC) to devise changes in the e-prisons software used in 1,300
prisons across the country, so that these prisoners were digitally recognized as a separate
category called “bailed out but-not-released”. Agreeing with the urgency shown in the NALSA
report and Mr. Agrawal’s suggestions, the court has issued seven directions to ensure that no
bailed-out under trial prisoner suffers prison because of poverty. For one, the Bench directed that
courts should send soft copies of bail orders to the prison authorities on the same or the next day.
The jail superintendent should record the date of the bail in the e-prisons software, the Bench
added. The prison authorities should then inform the district legal services authorities (DLSA)
concerned if an undertrial prisoner is not released within seven days of the grant of bail. The
DLSA would depute a volunteer or an advocate to visit the jail and “assist the prisoner in all
ways possible for his release”. ‘Temporary bail’ The NIC would “make attempts” to create
separate fields in the e-prison software to record the date of grant of bail and the date of release.
An automatic mail should be sent to the Secretary, DLSA, if a prisoner is not released in seven
days. Paralegal volunteers or probation offcers will enquire into the economic condition of such
prisoners and place it before the courts with a request to relax bail conditions. The Bench
directed that courts, in appropriate cases, could grant prisoners “temporary bail” so that they
could arrange for sureties and bail bonds. Suo motu action The Bench further said that in cases in
which bail bonds were not furnished within one month of granting the bail, the court concerned
“may suo motu take up the case and consider whether the conditions of bail require
modification/relaxation”. The Bench said that courts need not insist on local sureties, as ready
availability of them has often been a cause of delay in releasing bailed prisoners.
28
Page

Madhusudan Law university, Cuttack

 RIGHTS OF UNDER TRIAL PRISONERS A CRITICAL STUDY

CHAPTER VI

CONCLUSION

The importance of bail provisions and their underutilization has been reiterated on many
occasions. No person should be made to suffer the deprivations of incarceration before s/he has
been proven guilty in the eyes of law. By depriving them of their right to liberty through
unnecessary detention, the existing system “punishes” the accused in violation of the basic
principle of criminal jurisprudence that every person shall be presumed innocent till proven
guilty. To ensure justice for under-trial prisoners, it is essential to effectively implement the
existing provisions of the Cr.P.C. All the agencies of the criminal justice system including the
police, the judiciary, the prosecution, the defense lawyers and the prison department must adopt
a concerted and a well coordinated approach to ameliorate the plight of the ‘forgotten souls’ i.e.
under-trial prisoners, who languish in prisons unnecessarily. In India, we can observe that a
number of initiatives have been taken to transform prison facilities into correctional facilities and
to equally advance the rights of the nation’s prisoners. The treatment of prisoners awaiting trial is
still not satisfactory today, though. The rights of prisoners who are awaiting trial are frequently
violated. All of the rights guaranteed by the Indian Constitution and other laws, such as the Code
of Criminal Procedure, 1973, should be respected by the state and the judiciary.

29
Page

Madhusudan Law university, Cuttack

 RIGHTS OF UNDER TRIAL PRISONERS A CRITICAL STUDY
BIBLIOGRAPHY

1. https://thewire.in/government/droupadi-murmu-prisoners-rights-judiciary-
government
2. https://indiatomorrow.net/2022/12/08/president-droupadi-murmus-intervention-
compels-sc-to-order-setting-up-national-plan-to-release-prisoners-after-bail/
3. https://indianexpress.com/article/opinion/editorials/president-murmu-caution-
overcrowding-prisons-wake-up-call-executive-judiciary-8293265/
4. https://nhrc.nic.in/sites/default/files/Group%206%20June.pdf
5. https://indianlawinfo.in/human-rights-of-under-trial-prisoners-a-critical-study/
6. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/294343870_Under_Trial_Prisoners_in_In
dia_Long_Wait_for_Justice
7. https://www.academia.edu/21938744/Undertrial_Prisoners_in_India_Long_Wait_fo
r_Justice
8. https://www.academia.edu/15118467/Crisis_in_the_Justice_System_The_Case_of_U
ndertrial_Prisoners_in_India
9. https://www.humanrightsinitiative.org/download/1457162682Undertrial%20Prisone
rs%20and%20the%20Criminal%20Justice%20System.pdf

30
Page

Madhusudan Law university, Cuttack