Women in Custody
 

In 2016, the Ministry of Home Affairs released the Model Prison Manual, a comprehensive framework intended to standardize prison administration across India. Among its provisions was suggested that every state should establish at least one dedicated prison for women. A decade later, we reflect on the failure of the Manual’s implementation. Only 18 states and Union Territories in India have separate prisons for women, and merely 18% of women prisoners are housed in such facilities. Even these are often overcrowded, with women’s prisons in regions such as Delhi, West Bengal, Maharashtra, and the North-East operating beyond their designed capacity. The Central Women’s Jail in Mizoram, for instance, functions at approximately 164% occupancy.

​

Yet overcrowding is only one dimension of a deeper crisis. Many women in Indian prisons are incarcerated for offences tied to gendered social conditions - dowry-related violence, child marriage, or acts committed in response to domestic abuse. Within prisons, they often remain vulnerable to further exploitation. Reports from across the country document instances of physical and sexual violence by both inmates and authorities. However, the true scale of abuse is likely underreported, as prisoners fear retaliation and are compelled to coexist with perpetrators.

​

Recent developments underscore these concerns. In West Bengal, the Calcutta High Court and the Supreme Court of India examined allegations that female inmates had been impregnated while in custody, with an amicus curiae reporting the birth of around 196 children in prisons. The case prompted serious questions about custodial safety and led to proposals restricting male staff from women’s enclosures. In Mumbai, the custodial death of Manjula Shetye at Byculla Prison in 2017 drew national attention. She was allegedly assaulted by prison staff following a dispute over food conditions and later succumbed to her injuries.

​

Another persistent failing lies in the lack of adequate prenatal and childbirth facilities. In Laxmi v Union of India, the Delhi High Court held that denying maternal healthcare to women prisoners violates Article 21 of the Constitution (right to protection of life and personal liberty). Despite this, most facilities remain ill-equipped to meet even basic reproductive health needs. The urgency of reform is further heightened by the presence of children in prisons. In India, children up to the age of six may reside with their incarcerated mothers if no alternative care exists*. The landmark ruling in R.D. Upadhyay v State of A.P. recognized that these children, though innocent, effectively live in custody. It observed that their access to nutrition, healthcare, education, and recreation is severely constrained by prison conditions.​

​

Despite the normative framework set out by the Model Prison Manual and reinforced through judicial pronouncements, the lived realities of women prisoners continue to reflect systemic gaps in implementation, oversight, and accountability. Essentially, this highlights a system of incarceration for women that falls short in nearly every standard set for it.