Skip to main content

Healthcare for prisoners in India.

 HEALTHCARE FOR PRISONERS IN INDIA

It is the mentality of people that people send in prisons as punishment and not for punishment. Everyone believe that prisoners should not have a legal or human rights and they should be treated harshly in any possible manner.

Prisoner are given many rights as per international treaties. And among these rights one of the rights is right to  healthcare and to be free from contact of any disease. Laws related to prisoners also states that prisoners not lose all their rights only because of imprisonment.

Public health policies aim to provide the best possible living conditions for all members of society in order for everyone to be healthy. However, the prisoners are frequently excluded from these policies. Prisoners are the people who came into contact of lot of people on day-to-day basis and because of which they are very much prone to disease which demands an extra care for them and for the people who have contact outside this community.

Almost all the prisoners undergo medical examination when they began serving their sentence but after the sentence begins the examination is done rarely. Only a few jails have established informal contacts with medical and social organisations for custodial counselling. The situation is more pathetic in tehsil level jails where even basic facilities are not provided.

The monotonous prison environment, lack of mental and physical stimulation, and plain boredom all contribute to accumulated frustration and tension. For this type of situation, a counsellor is also required.

Supreme Court in its landmark decision in Parmanand Katara vs Union of India (1989) and others, the Supreme Court of India ruled that the state has an obligation to preserve life regardless of whether the person is innocent or a criminal liable to punishment under the law. In terms of health, the right to adequate conditions for the health and well-being of all was already recognised in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Furthermore, the International Covenant on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights (ICESR) states that prisoners have a right to the best possible physical and mental health.

ROLE OF JUDICIARY IN PROTECTING THE RIGHTS OF PRISONERS

The superior courts in India i.e., the Supreme Court and the High court has obligation to protect human rights of every citizen. Article 21 of the constitution has provision for the preservation and protection of prisoner’s right in order to maintain their dignity. The rights of prisoners is also dealt in Prison Act, 1894 and the code of criminal procedure. 

In Rasikbhai Ramsun Rana vs. State of Gujarat, the Gujarat High Court ruled that petitioners put in prison in the Central Prison, Vadodara, who were suffering from serious illnesses, were denied adequate and prompt medical care due to a lack of jail escorts required to transport them to the hospital, and that the court held negligent officers personally accountable.

The Supreme Court ruled in the landmark case of Parmanand Katara vs Union of India (1989 AIR 2039) that the state has a duty to maintain life regardless of whether the individual is innocent or guilty of a crime, establishing a strong precedent for prisoners' rights in India, particularly the fundamental right to health guaranteed by Article 21 of the Indian Constitution.

COVID AND PRISONER’S HEALTHCARE

COVID-19 has clarified the inadequacy of healthcare provided to Indian prisoners. Failure to address the health crisis imposes a new informal punishment on top of the formal one imposed by the courts. It must come to an end. It can be seen that the Supreme Court has been doing its best to improve the situation, but government interference is making certain things difficult for the inmates to survive in such a place. Experimentation has also shown that financial flexibility and decision-making autonomy help to avoid unnecessary bureaucratic delays. Personalized prison management and collaboration with outside businesses can improve food quality, sanitation, medical facilities, and the behaviour of prisoners.


It is hoped that the situation will improve in the near future, as prisoners continue to be protected in terms of life and personal liberty.
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Section 58B of The Advocates Act - Special provision relating to certain disciplinary proceedings

 Section 58B The Advocates Act Description (1) As from the 1st day of September, 1963, every proceeding in respect of any disciplinary matter in relation to an existing advocate of a High Court shall, save as provided in the first proviso to sub-section (2), be disposed of by the State Bar Council in relation to that High Court, as if the existing advocate had been enrolled as an advocate on its roll. (2) If immediately before the said date, there is any proceeding in respect of any disciplinary matter in relation to an existing advocate pending before any High Court under the Indian Bar Councils Act, 1926 (38 of 1926), such proceeding shall stand transferred to the State Bar Council in relation to that High Court, as if it were a proceeding pending before the corresponding Bar Council under clause (c) of sub-section (1) of section 56: Provided that where in respect of any such proceeding the High Court has received the finding of a Tribunal constituted under section 11 of the Indian B
Post a Comment
Read more

Case Laws related to Defamation in favour of ClaimantCase Laws related to Defamation in favour of Claimant. TOLLEY Vs, J.S FRY & SONS LTD – (1931) Facts The defendants were owners of chocolate manufacturing company. They advertised their products with a caricature of the claimant, who was a prominent amateur golfer, showing him with the defendants’ chocolate in his pocket while playing golf. The advertisement compared the excellence of the chocolate to the excellence of the claimant’s drive. The claimant did not consent to or knew about the advertisement. Issue The claimant alleged that the advertisement suggested that he agreed to his portrait being used for commercial purposes and for financial gain. He further claimed that the use of his image made him look like someone who prostituted his reputation for advertising purposes and was thus unworthy of his status. At trial, several golfers gave evidence to the effect that if an amateur sold himself for advertisement, he no longer maintained his amateur status and might be asked to resign from his respective club. Furthermore, there was evidence that the possible adverse effects of the caricature on the claimant’s reputation were brought to the defendants’ attention. The trial judge found that the caricature could have a defamatory meaning. The jury then found in favor of the claimant. Held The House of Lords held that in the circumstances of this case – as explained by the facts – the caricature was capable of constituting defamation. In other words, the publication could have the meaning alleged by the claimant. The Lords also ordered a new trial limited to the assessment of damages. NEWSTEAD V LANDON EXPRESS NEWSPAPER LTD, (1939) Facts: A newspaper published a defamatory article about Harold Newstead. However, another person with this name brought an action in libel. He claimed that the article had been misunderstood as leading to him. The defendant newspaper recognised that they published the article. Also, they denied that they had the intention of being defamatory of him. Consequently, the claimant argued that the newspaper was under a duty. The duty was to give a clear and complete description of the correct person. Moreover, the claimant argued that the defendants were in breach of the duty. Issues: The issue in Newstead v London Express Newspaper, was if the reasonable persons would have understood the words complained of to refer to the plaintiff. Held: The Court of Appeal stated that in accordance with the current law on libel, liability for libel does not depend on the intention of the defamer; but on the fact of the defamation. Accordingly, a reasonable man, in this case a newspaper publisher, must be aware of the possibility of individuals with the same name and must assume that the words published will be read by a reasonable man with reasonable care.

  Case Laws related to Defamation in favour of Claimant.  TOLLEY  Vs,  J.S FRY & SONS LTD – (1931) Facts The defendants were owners of chocolate manufacturing company. They advertised their products with a caricature of the claimant, who was a prominent amateur golfer, showing him with the defendants’ chocolate in his pocket while playing golf. The advertisement compared the excellence of the chocolate to the excellence of the claimant’s drive. The claimant did not consent to or knew about the advertisement.   Issue The claimant alleged that the advertisement suggested that he agreed to his portrait being used for commercial purposes and for financial gain. He further claimed that the use of his image made him look like someone who prostituted his reputation for advertising purposes and was thus unworthy of his status. At trial, several golfers gave evidence to the effect that if an amateur sold himself for advertisement, he no longer maintained his amateur status and might be aske
1 comment
Read more

Rules as to delivery of goods

                             Rules as to delivery of goods Section 2(2) of Sale of Goods Act defines ‘delivery’ as a ‘voluntary transfer of possession from one person to another.’ Thus, if the transfer of goods is not voluntary and is taken by theft, by fraud, or by force, then there is no ‘delivery. Moreover, the ‘delivery’ should have the effect of putting the goods in possession of the buyer. The essence of the delivery is a voluntary transfer of possession of goods from one person to another. There is no delivery of goods where they are obtained at pistol point or theft. 1. Mode of Delivery: According to Section 33, delivery of goods sold may be made by doing anything which the parties agree shall be treated as delivery or which has the effect of putting the goods in the possession of the buyer or of any person authorized to hold them on his behalf. Delivery of goods may be actual, symbolic or constructive. 2. Expenses of Delivery: According to Section 36(5), unless otherwise agree
Post a Comment
Read more