The Calcutta High Court issued a warning on Tuesday about unjustly accusing pregnant inmates of West Bengali jails or correctional facilities in court, as this could damage their dignity and image. Justices Joymalya Bagchi and Gaurang Kanth noted that such women should not be subjected to any “secondary victimisation” through the legal system.
We kindly ask all relevant parties, including legal counsel, to refrain from disclosing the identities of pregnant inmates or any other information that would diminish women’s dignity and respect. It doesn’t matter what it is; they are already victims. The Court stated, “They may be in correctional homes due to certain crimes, but they must be treated in a way that allows them to be rehabilitated back into society.
Notably, there had recently been a stir about a submission filed by an amicus curiae before the High Court alleging that women incarcerated in West Bengal were becoming pregnant while serving their sentences. Following the High Court, this claim was also duly noted by the Supreme Court. But as time went on, the Supreme Court was told that the majority of the female inmates had already become pregnant when they were taken to the prisons. The High Court voiced worries about the dignity and privacy of these pregnant inmates on Tuesday.
Additionally, it disregarded the amicus’s recommendation that the female inmates be required to take a pregnancy test prior to being locked up. “The level of private invasion will correspond to the requirements of her incarceration. She must voluntarily consent to a pregnancy test if she so chooses. The Court declared, “We do not propose needless invasions of privacy simply because someone has been brought as an undertrial and is a suspect.” It further stated that those in the jail population who seem to be at risk would need to be protected by the system. However, the Court noted that these inmates cannot be the subject of disproportionate surveillance.
It’s akin to telling women to lock up because they are being catcalled on the street. We don’t suggest following such a process. Don’t take too drastic or invasive of a step, Justice Bagchi said. A number of petitions concerning the state of inmates housed in West Bengal’s penal facilities were being heard by the court. Following the submission regarding pregnant inmates, a division bench led by Chief Justice TS Sivagnanam recently sent the case to a bench headed by Justice Bagchi. During the hearing yesterday, a lawyer objected to the manner in which the Court was presented with this matter.
“At the request of the amicus, let none of these be posted on social media. It makes a rather pitiful figure. He replied, “The judiciary is brought to mockery. But the bench, led by Justice Bagchi, noted that because the Court values open justice, it would be reluctant to impose any sort of gag order. It was also recommended that the solicitors involved in the case take responsibility for their remarks. The Court said, “Having said that, constructive criticism of the state and judiciary is always welcome.”
With reference to the submission made by the amicus about the pregnancies of female prisoners, The Court also expressed hope that the amicus had submitted his prior information about female prisoner pregnancies based on a plausible suspicion that these pregnancies happened within prisons.
“We are aware of the breadth of your work in prisons, and we will certainly take your expertise and study into consideration. The Court stated, “What we intend to say is let there be a certain amount of sobriety in the process of how we approach the problem.” The Court further stated that no one was contesting the issue’s existence. It went on to say that an amicus’s last observation has an impact on the legal system as a whole.
The Court said, “You have expressed a concern, and we will look into the issue,” and said it will ask the State to provide the number of staff members—including men—who are stationed outside the enclosure housing the female inmates. Advocate General Kishore Datta told the court that the Supreme Court was now considering the issue of pregnant inmates. As a result, the High Court requested a report on more prison-related matters.
In order to discuss several concerns pertaining to state prisons, the Court further requested that AG Datta call a meeting of all interested parties, including the amici curiae. “Broad issues to be addressed may be enumerated and placed before us for independent consideration during the meeting,” the Court stated prior to postponing the case until March 8.
