RTI for Prisons and Undertrials: Jail Conditions, Custodial Deaths, and Your Rights Inside

India's prison system holds more than five lakh people at any given time. Of these, more than 75 percent are undertrials — people who have not been convicted of any crime but are waiting for their cases to be heard in court. Many have been inside for years. Some have served more time as undertrials than they would have served as convicts had they been found guilty of the offences they are charged with.

Behind the walls of a jail, accountability is thin. Families of inmates often do not know which facility their relative has been transferred to, what the conditions are, whether they have access to a lawyer, or — in the most tragic cases — what exactly happened when someone died in custody. The institutions that hold the power of physical confinement are the ones least subject to public scrutiny.

The Right to Information Act, 2005 changes that. Prisons are public authorities. Their records — capacity figures, undertrial counts, inspection reports, diet budgets, custodial death inquiries — are accessible to any citizen. This guide explains exactly what can be obtained, from whom, and how.

Prisons Are Public Authorities

The starting point is understanding the legal structure. Prisons in India are a state subject. Entry 4 of List II (State List) of the Seventh Schedule to the Constitution gives state legislatures power over "Prisons, reformatories, Borstal institutions and other institutions of a like nature, and persons detained therein." This means prisons are administered by state governments, not the Central Government.

The central statute is the Prisons Act, 1894, which sets minimum standards for the management of jails, prisoner treatment, and record-keeping. Most states also have their own Acts. Delhi, for instance, has the Delhi Prisons Act, 2000. The Superintendent of a jail is the primary authority, and each state has a Directorate General of Prisons or equivalent department overseeing the entire prison system.

Because prisons are state-administered, RTI applications about them go to state public authorities — typically the Superintendent of the concerned jail (as the CPIO) or the Directorate General of Prisons of the state. Appeals, if unresolved, go to the State Information Commission (SIC) under Section 15 of the RTI Act. For Delhi's jails — Tihar, Rohini, and Mandoli — the second appeal body is the Delhi Information Commission (DIC).

The Prisons Act, 1894 imposes specific record-keeping obligations on jail superintendents: admission registers, prisoner movement records, medical records, visitor logs, dietary registers. These obligations create a paper trail that RTI can access.

The Model Prisons and Correctional Services Act, 2023

Parliament enacted the Model Prisons and Correctional Services Act, 2023 as a framework legislation providing updated standards for accommodation, diet, medical care, education, vocational training, and open prisons. Because prisons are a state subject, this Act is a model — states need to formally adopt it or enact equivalent legislation.

This creates a specific and powerful use of RTI: asking state prison departments about their implementation of the 2023 Act. You can ask:

• "Please confirm whether state has adopted the Model Prisons and Correctional Services Act, 2023. If yes, please provide the date of adoption and the gazette notification."
• "Please provide the status of implementation of the provisions relating to accommodation standards and medical care under the Model Prisons and Correctional Services Act, 2023 in specific jail."
• "What steps has the state Prison Department taken to comply with the standards for diet and nutrition prescribed under the Model Prisons and Correctional Services Act, 2023?"

These questions put the burden on the prison department to explain what it has and has not done to modernise conditions. Unanswered or evasive responses are themselves revealing.

What RTI Can Access About Jails

Overcrowding Data

India's prisons are severely overcrowded. The official capacity figures and actual population figures are maintained by every jail superintendent and compiled by state prison departments. This data is not secret — the National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB) publishes it annually in its Prison Statistics India report — but RTI gives you the ability to request current, facility-specific data rather than relying on annual aggregate statistics.

Ask:

"Please provide the sanctioned capacity (number of inmates the facility is designed to hold) and the actual occupancy (number of inmates currently held) at specific jail name as of specific date."

You can also ask for the breakdown by category: convicts versus undertrials, male versus female, adults versus juveniles. If the facility holds more inmates than its sanctioned capacity, that is overcrowding — and it is a documented rights violation that can be pursued before the High Court or the SIC.

Undertrial Statistics and Section 436A

Section 436A of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (now Section 479 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023) is one of the most important — and most ignored — provisions in Indian criminal procedure. It entitles an undertrial who has served more than half the maximum period of imprisonment for the offence they are charged with to be released on bail, at the discretion of the court.

The intent is clear: an undertrial should not serve more time awaiting trial than they would serve if convicted. But implementation depends on jails identifying and flagging such cases. RTI is a tool to verify whether this is being done.

Ask:

"Please provide the number of undertrials currently held in jail who have completed more than half the maximum sentence prescribed for the offence with which they are charged, as required to be tracked under Section 436A of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (or Section 479 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023)."

"Please provide details of any applications made under Section 436A CrPC / Section 479 BNSS on behalf of undertrials in jail during financial year, including the number of applications filed and the outcomes."

If the jail cannot produce this data, it likely means the tracking is not being done at all — which is itself a finding of administrative failure that can be brought before the High Court.

You can also ask for aggregate undertrial statistics:

"Please provide the number of undertrials currently held in jail who have been in custody for more than: (a) one year; (b) two years; (c) five years."

Custodial Deaths

Custodial deaths — deaths occurring in judicial custody in jails, as distinct from deaths in police custody — are among the most serious human rights issues in India. The National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) has issued guidelines requiring every custodial death to be reported to the NHRC within 24 hours and to be subject to a magisterial inquiry.

RTI can access records of these deaths and, crucially, the inquiry reports.

Ask the jail / state prison department:

"Please provide the number of deaths of inmates (whether convicts or undertrials) that occurred at jail during the period from date to date, categorised by: (a) natural causes; (b) suicide; (c) accidental causes; (d) other causes."

"Please provide copies of the magisterial inquiry reports ordered into the death of specific person who died in jail on approximate date."

"Please provide the action taken by the Prison Department on the recommendations of the magisterial inquiry reports relating to custodial deaths at jail during period."

For national aggregate data, you can file an RTI with the NHRC (a Central public authority, with second appeal to the CIC):

"Please provide the number of custodial deaths (in judicial custody) reported to the NHRC from state during year, and the number of cases in which the NHRC has issued show-cause notices or recommended compensation."

One important limitation: Section 8(1)(h) of the RTI Act permits a public authority to withhold information that would impede the process of investigation or prosecution. This means if a custodial death investigation is ongoing — and particularly if a criminal case has been registered — the inquiry records may be withheld during the pendency of the investigation. However, once the magisterial inquiry is complete and its report submitted, the report is a finished document and is disclosable. Do not accept a blanket Section 8(1)(h) refusal on an inquiry report that was completed months ago.

Food and Medical Care

The Prisons Act, 1894 prescribes standards for prisoner diet. State Prison Acts and rules specify rations. State governments are required to appoint inspection committees that visit jails and record conditions. District Magistrates and Session Judges are also authorised to inspect jails.

RTI can surface what these inspections found:

"Please provide the inspection report(s) of jail conducted by the District Magistrate / Session Judge / Inspection Committee during the period date range."

"Please provide the budget allocated for diet (food) per inmate per day at jail for the financial year year, and the actual expenditure per inmate per day during the same period."

"Please provide the number of inmates at jail who were referred to external hospitals for medical treatment during period, and the medical conditions for which they were referred."

Discrepancies between the prescribed dietary standards and the actual expenditure figures tell a clear story about whether prisoners are being fed adequately.

Legal Aid Access

Every undertrial has a constitutional right to free legal aid under Article 39A of the Constitution, backed by the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987. District Legal Services Authorities (DLSAs) and State Legal Services Authorities (SLSAs) are responsible for providing lawyers to undertrials who cannot afford one.

But the gap between the legal right and the reality is enormous. RTI can document it:

File with the DLSA (which is a state public authority, with second appeal to the SIC/DIC):

"Please provide the number of undertrials in jail who have been assigned legal aid counsel through the DLSA/DSLSA during period."

"Please provide the number of visits made by legal aid counsel to jail under the Lok Adalat / legal aid scheme during period."

File with the jail / prison department:

"Please provide records showing how many undertrials in jail have indicated to the jail administration that they do not have a lawyer representing them, and the steps taken to connect them to legal aid."

The right to legal aid is meaningless if the jail administration does not identify undertrials who need it and connect them to the DLSA. RTI can reveal whether this pipeline exists.

Bail Compliance

Courts routinely grant bail to undertrials. Sometimes people remain in jail despite having a bail order because they cannot furnish a surety or the administrative process for their release is slow. RTI can help surface these cases:

"Please provide the number of undertrials in jail who have been granted bail by a competent court but who have not been released as of date, along with the duration for which each such undertrial has remained in custody after the bail order."

A person sitting in jail after a bail order has been passed in their favour is a direct deprivation of liberty without legal basis. This is the kind of information that, when surfaced through RTI, immediately attracts High Court attention.

What RTI Cannot Obtain Directly

RTI is not an all-access pass to every piece of information about the prison system. There are specific limits.

Individual prisoner records as personal information (Section 8(1)(j)): If you ask for the charge sheet, sentence details, or personal case file of a named individual who is not your client or immediate family member, the PIO may refuse under Section 8(1)(j) — personal information that has no relationship to any public activity and whose disclosure would cause unwarranted invasion of privacy. A family member asking about their own relative, or a lawyer holding a vakalatnama asking about their client, stands on stronger ground than an unrelated third party.

Ongoing investigation records (Section 8(1)(h)): Records relating to an active criminal investigation or prosecution can be withheld. This is a legitimate exemption. However, it applies to the investigation itself, not to the fact of custody or general conditions.

Attorney-client communications: Communications between a prisoner and their lawyer are privileged. These are not held by the prison administration in any case — but even if they were, they would not be disclosable.

Sealed records in pending cases: Court records in pending cases are the domain of the court, not the prison department. RTI to the prison department cannot substitute for court filings.

Family Members and Lawyers: Special Considerations

A family member of a prisoner occupies a different position from a general RTI applicant when asking about a specific person. A question like "Is name, who was arrested on date by police station, currently held in jail?" is a question about detention status — it directly concerns the liberty of a named person and is, under the proviso to Section 7(1), a matter that the PIO should address within 48 hours rather than the standard 30 days (see our separate guide on the 48-hour rule for life-and-liberty matters).

Jail superintendents are required to maintain admission and release registers. A family member has a legitimate interest in knowing whether their relative is held at a specific facility. This is different from asking for the case details or charge sheet — it is a question about physical location and detention status.

A lawyer who holds a valid vakalatnama for a client in custody can use RTI as a supplementary tool to obtain administrative records about the facility — inspection reports, medical referrals, legal aid rosters — that supplement what can be obtained through court processes.

Section 4 and Proactive Disclosure

Section 4 of the RTI Act requires every public authority to proactively publish key information without waiting for an RTI request. Prison departments are required to publish, among other things, information about the facilities they manage, the rules and procedures they follow, and any arrangements for inspection or grievance redressal.

Most prison departments do not fully comply with Section 4. RTI can be used specifically to enforce this obligation:

"Please provide a list of all information that state Prison Department / Directorate General of Prisons has published under Section 4(1)(b) of the RTI Act, along with the URL or location where this information is publicly available."

"Please provide the sanctioned capacity and current occupancy figures for each jail in state — information that the Prison Department is required to publish under Section 4 of the RTI Act."

When a prison department has not published what Section 4 requires, the RTI application itself puts them on notice and creates a record that can be used in litigation before the SIC or the High Court.

Filing RTI with the NHRC

The National Human Rights Commission is a Central public authority. RTI applications to the NHRC go through the Central appeals chain — First Appeal within the NHRC, Second Appeal to the CIC under Section 19(3).

The NHRC maintains aggregate data on custodial death complaints, state-wise. Useful questions:

"Please provide the number of complaints relating to custodial deaths in judicial custody received by the NHRC from state during year, and a summary of the action taken in each category of case."

"Please provide the NHRC's recommendations, if any, issued to the state government regarding prison conditions during period."

This data can be used alongside state-level RTI responses to build a comprehensive picture of accountability — or its absence.

The Appeals Chain

Because prison departments are state authorities, the appeals structure is:

1. First Appeal (Section 19(1)): File with the First Appellate Authority (the officer senior to the Superintendent, typically within the Prison Department) within 30 days of the CPIO's response or the expiry of the 30-day response period.
2. Second Appeal (Section 19(3)): If unsatisfied, escalate to the State Information Commission (or the Delhi Information Commission for Delhi's jails) within 90 days of the FAA's decision. The SIC/DIC can direct disclosure and can impose a personal financial penalty of up to ₹25,000 on the PIO under Section 20 for wilful non-compliance or obstruction.

For applications to Central bodies like the NHRC, the Second Appeal goes to the Central Information Commission (CIC) under Section 19(3).

Why Prison RTI Matters

The people inside jails are among the least visible citizens in India. They cannot file their own RTI applications easily. They cannot hold press conferences. They depend on families, lawyers, and civil society organisations to ask questions on their behalf.

An RTI application asking about overcrowding in Tihar Jail or the number of custodial deaths in a district jail is not a bureaucratic exercise. It is an act of accountability directed at institutions that hold extraordinary power over human beings — the power to take away their freedom, and in the worst cases, to take away their lives.

The information that RTI can obtain — overcrowding ratios, undertrial durations, custodial death records, inspection reports, legal aid statistics — is the raw material of accountability. When it is gathered systematically, it creates a documentary record that courts, human rights commissions, and the press can act on.

Section 8 exemptions exist, and should be respected. But the default position of the RTI Act is disclosure, not secrecy. A prison department that refuses to tell a citizen how many people it is holding, or what its inspection reports say, is not protecting any legitimate state interest. It is simply avoiding accountability.

Need Help Filing an RTI About a Jail or Prison?

If you are trying to find out about a detained family member, document conditions in a specific facility, or obtain records relating to a custodial death, RTI Sathi can help you draft a focused, legally accurate application addressed to the right authority. We will make sure your questions are framed to be answerable — specific, factual, and grounded in the correct legal provisions — so that a refusal or evasion is harder to sustain on appeal.

Visit RTISathi.com to get started.