Disclaimer: This article is a work of non-fiction, which is unfortunate because if it were fiction, at least someone would have had the decency to include a happy ending. Any resemblance to real people, events, or institutions is purely intentional, because reality has already outdone satire. If you find yourself alarmed by the contents of this piece, rest assured that you are not alone. If you find yourself unsurprised, you may wish to reevaluate your standards for outrage.
If you have ever played a game of musical chairs, you might have noticed that the moment the music stops, people scramble to find a seat, and those who fail are left standing, humiliated, and pondering their life choices. Now, imagine if the rules of the game were slightly altered—specifically, that anyone left standing would be immediately imprisoned until further notice. This, dear reader, is not far from how India’s criminal justice system handles undertrials—people who have not been convicted of any crime but, through the magic of bureaucratic inertia, find themselves in prison anyway.
The Curious Case of the Unconvicted Prisoners
India’s legal system, like an overcooked soufflé, is delicate, impressive in theory, and prone to collapsing under the slightest pressure. One of its loftiest ideals is that a person is innocent until proven guilty. This phrase means that, legally speaking, a person accused of a crime should not be treated as if they have already committed it. Unfortunately, like most things in life—such as New Year’s resolutions or “low-fat” dessert labels—this principle is routinely ignored.
Instead, a large number of people who are merely accused of a crime are placed in the same prisons as convicted criminals while the investigation is pending, as if the distinction between possibly guilty and definitely guilty is as irrelevant as the difference between soup and cereal.
A Majority of the Misfortunate
In India, undertrials make up 77% of the prison population. To put that into perspective, imagine attending a concert where 77% of the audience was made up of people who hadn’t even bought tickets but were forced inside anyway. That, of course, would be absurd. And yet, it is apparently less absurd when applied to prisons.
Undertrials are theoretically detained to prevent them from fleeing or tampering with evidence. However, in reality, many of them remain imprisoned not because they are particularly flighty or skilled at document destruction, but because they are too poor to afford bail, too unlucky to have a speedy trial, and too invisible for anyone to care.
Problems with the Current System (Or, How to Make a Bad Situation Worse)
Violation of Rights: The fundamental right to liberty, which is enshrined in the Indian Constitution, is about as useful to an undertrial as an umbrella in a hurricane.
Exploitation and Stigma: Placing undertrials with convicted criminals is like dropping a goldfish into a shark tank and expecting it to survive or at least develop a better sense of resilience.
Overcrowding: Indian prisons currently operate at 130% capacity, which means they contain 30% more people than they should. This would be alarming in any situation, but particularly so in a place where personal space is already nonexistent.
Uniform Restrictions: Even though undertrials are technically innocent, they are subjected to the same restrictions as convicts, including limited visitation, harsh living conditions, and a dress code that suggests they have already lost the battle with justice.
How to Fix the Unfixable
Much like trying to assemble a piece of IKEA furniture without the manual, fixing this situation is theoretically possible but practically exhausting. Here are some ways to attempt it:
Separate Facilities: Undertrials should have dedicated centers focused on ensuring they attend trials rather than punishing them in advance.
Quicker Trials: Given that some people have spent more time in jail waiting for trial than the sentence for their crime, speeding up the judicial process seems like an obviously good idea.
Alternative Detentions: House arrest, electronic monitoring, and community service could keep non-violent undertrials out of prison—assuming, of course, that the system is interested in fairness rather than convenience.
Better Prison Segregation: If separate facilities aren’t feasible, at least keeping undertrials separate from convicted criminals would be a start. (Or, at the very least, making sure they aren’t bunking with someone whose idea of fun involves sticking stuff with pointy ends.)
Other Countries and Their Mysterious Ability to Do Better
Some countries—such as the UK, Canada, and the US—have managed to establish systems where undertrials are housed separately from convicts. This suggests that distinguishing between accused and convicted people is not an impossible feat, much like distinguishing between tea and coffee. And yet, here we are, dunking everyone into the same unfortunate pot.
Conclusion: The Art of Ignoring Injustice
India’s habit of mixing undertrials and convicts is not just a legal oversight—it is a deliberate and ongoing act of absurdity. By imprisoning people who might be guilty alongside those who definitely are, the justice system transforms into a malfunctioning vending machine, randomly dispensing punishment without checking whether the money was inserted properly.
Justice, in theory, is about fairness. In practice, it is about convenience. And right now, it is much more convenient to pretend that all prisoners are the same—until, of course, you find yourself in a situation where the only crime you committed was being born in a country where the judiciary is slower than the grim reaper.
