Advanced International Journal for Research
E-ISSN: 3048-7641
•
Impact Factor: 9.11
A Widely Indexed Open Access Peer Reviewed Multidisciplinary Bi-monthly Scholarly International Journal
Home
Research Paper
Submit Research Paper
Publication Guidelines
Publication Charges
Upload Documents
Track Status / Pay Fees / Download Publication Certi.
Editors & Reviewers
View All
Join as a Reviewer
Get Membership Certificate
Current Issue
Publication Archive
Conference
Publishing Conf. with AIJFR
Upcoming Conference(s) ↓
WSMCDD-2025
GSMCDD-2025
Conferences Published ↓
RBS:RH-COVID-19 (2023)
ICMRS'23
PIPRDA-2023
Contact Us
Plagiarism is checked by the leading plagiarism checker
Call for Paper
Volume 7 Issue 4
July-August 2026
Indexing Partners
Custodial death of under trial prisoners in India : Human Rights, health care, and the evolving jurisprudence of constitutional compensation
| Author(s) | Mr. Rajesh M |
|---|---|
| Country | India |
| Abstract | Custodial death of an undertrial prisoner presents one of the most serious challenges to constitutional governance because it occurs within an environment in which the State exercises direct control over liberty, movement, healthcare, communication, and access to emergency medical assistance. The constitutional position is particularly sensitive where the deceased had not been convicted and was therefore presumed innocent at the time of detention. This paper examines custodial deaths of undertrial prisoners in India through the interconnected dimensions of human rights, healthcare obligations, Article 21 of the Constitution, State accountability, and public-law compensation. The paper argues that custodial death cannot be examined only through the immediate medical cause of death. A meaningful constitutional inquiry must also examine the institutional chain preceding death: whether illness was detected, whether medical attention was timely, whether treatment was adequate, whether specialist referral was made and completed, whether medicines and follow-up were maintained, and whether the prison administration responded appropriately to deterioration. The jurisprudence of the Supreme Court—from Sunil Batra, Pt. Parmanand Katara, and Paschim Banga to Nilabati Behera, D.K. Basu, Sube Singh, and the Court's later compensation jurisprudence—demonstrates the evolution from formal recognition of prisoners' rights towards positive State obligations and effective constitutional remedies. The paper further argues that the emerging digitalisation of prison healthcare creates an important opportunity to strengthen constitutional accountability. Electronic health records, telemedicine, digital referral tracking, interoperable prison-health systems, audit trails, and carefully governed artificial intelligence can improve continuity of care and reduce information asymmetry between the prisoner and the State. However, digitalisation also creates risks concerning privacy, surveillance, cybersecurity, data accuracy, and automated decision-making. A rights-based model is therefore necessary. The paper proposes that digital healthcare governance should be understood not merely as administrative modernisation but as a mechanism of preventive constitutional accountability. Its central proposition is that digitalisation should make the State's healthcare obligations continuous, preventive, traceable, and accountable, while ensuring that technology remains subordinate to dignity, medical judgment, privacy, and constitutional rights. |
| Keywords | Keywords: Undertrial prisoners; custodial death; Article 21; human rights; healthcare; constitutional compensation; public-law remedy; digital healthcare; telemedicine; privacy; accountability. |
| Published In | Volume 7, Issue 4, July-August 2026 |
| Published On | 2026-08-07 |
Share this

E-ISSN 3048-7641
CrossRef DOI is assigned to each research paper published in our journal.
AIJFR DOI prefix is
10.63363/aijfr
Downloads
All research papers published on this website are licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License, and all rights belong to their respective authors/researchers.