Latest news with #RiteshkumarSShah
Indian Express
08-07-2025
- Indian Express
What courts have held on religious preferences in the food served in prisons
A Mumbai special court last month issued a show-cause notice to the superintendent of the Mumbai Central Prison following a complaint by an undertrial prisoner about the food served. The prisoner alleged that the prison had failed to serve him Jain food despite a court directive and that he had subsisted on chappatis since May. Jail manuals typically specify the type of food to be served in prison, down to the milligram. Here is what to know. In March 2025, the Enforcement Directorate (ED) arrested Mumbai resident Riteshkumar S Shah in connection with its investigation into the misuse of bank accounts of Malegaon residents for money laundering. He first approached the special court designated under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) in May, stating that he is a follower of Jainism. Shah pleaded that as a lifelong follower of Jainism, he had followed a strict diet based on the religious requirements, and that the food served in jail did not meet his dietary preferences. The plea said that this was affecting his health and that he had lost substantial weight. The court allowed his plea on May 14, noting that as the 'accused is a follower of Jainism', he is 'entitled to get diet accepted by Jain religion'. The court directed the superintendent to provide him with Jain food. In June, the court issued a show cause notice to the prison after Shah approached the court a second time, claiming that the jail had not complied with this order and that he was only surviving on chapatis. The superintendent told the court that Shah was being provided dal and sabzi (vegetable gravy) without onion, garlic and potatoes, as is his religious requirement. This week, Shah told the court that the jail had complied with the order for a few days, but had since stopped providing him with the requisite meals, following which the court again issued directions to the jail. What are the rules about food for undertrials and convicts as per prison rules? The Model Prison Manual issued by the Ministry of Home Affairs states that an average man requires 2,000 to 2,400 calories a day, while a person engaged in heavy labour requires a minimum of 2,800 calories. A woman, on the other hand, requires around 2,400 calories per day. The manual further specifies the nutrients required, including protein and vitamins. Since prisons are a state subject, the model manual states that the scale of the diet may be drawn based on the climatic conditions, as well as the needs and habits of prisoners in each state. 'Prisoners who observe religious fasts may receive extra articles of food, or may have the whole or a part of their meal at a place and time of the day, as may be allowed by orders of the government for proper observance of fasts from them,' the model manual says. The manual also prohibits the management of the kitchen and the cooking of food based on caste or religion in prisons. Prison officials in Maharashtra said that if a prisoner informs them about a particular religious requirement food-wise, they will make arrangements wherever possible. For instance, during the month of Shravan, when many Hindus fast, fruits and sabudana-based food items are made available in the canteen. During the month of Ramzan, prison officials make arrangements for food to be served before sunrise to those fasting. There have been instances, however, when prisoners have approached courts seeking permission for home-cooked food, citing religious requirements. How have courts ruled on providing prisoners with food according to their dietary choices? There have been multiple judgments on the rights and constitutional safeguards available to prisoners who have their liberty curtailed, either as an undertrial facing charges or a convict, found guilty of having committed an offence. But prisoners are bound by strict rules part of the jail manuals, including when they wake up, mealtimes, when they can venture out of their barracks and when they must return to them. Choice in food is also therefore limited. Apart from the meals served to them by the jail officials, either by prisoners themselves in some jail from a pre-decided menu, or by staffers, they are only free to buy what is available in the jail canteen. In 1958, the Allahabad High Court in Lakshmi Narain vs The State observed that 'jails are not places where people can have their own choice of food or their own choice in other matters'. While some safeguards have been instituted since, such as regular checks on the quality of the food following frequent prisoner complaints of substandard quality, there is no uniform policy on serving food according to one's religious practice. The prison administration decides the food served unless specific directions are given by the courts. In 2017, the Punjab and Haryana High Court observed that there should be a uniform policy on the two meals to be provided for prisoners fasting during Ramzan, following a petition on the subject. In 2022, then Aam Aadmi Party minister Satyendra Jain, arrested on charges of money laundering, claimed that he was not being given food according to his religious belief as a follower of Jainism. The special court had rejected his plea stating that 'special treatment' cannot be given to any person.
Indian Express
26-06-2025
- Indian Express
Jail superintendent issued notice for not providing Jain food to accused
A special court in Mumbai has issued show-cause notice to the superintendent of Arthur Road jail this week after an accused complained that he is surviving only on chapatis since May as he is not being provided Jain food despite the court's order. Riteshkumar S Shah was arrested in March by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) in connection with its probe where Malegaon residents' bank accounts were allegedly misused for money laundering. On May 9, Shah filed a plea before the special court stating that he is a follower of Jainism and had been following a strict diet based on the religious requirements. In his plea, Shah said that the food being served at Arthur Road jail was not as per his dietary requirements and was affecting his health, leading to him losing substantial weight. Allowing his plea, the special court on May 14, directed the jail authorities to provide him with 'Jain food'. 'Considering the fact that the accused is a follower of Jainism, therefore, he is entitled to get diet accepted by Jain religion. Accordingly, the superintendent of Arthur Road jail is directed to provide Jain food to the accused while he is in custody,' the court order said. On June 24, Shah again approached the court through his lawyer Viral Babar, and submitted that despite the clear direction from the court, he has not been provided Jain food. 'As a result, the accused has been surviving solely on chapatis for more than a month, which has caused significant deterioration in his health. This non-compliance amounts to a violation of the Honourable court's order and infringes upon the fundamental rights of the accused under Article 21 of the Constitution of India,' the plea seeking a show-cause notice said. The court issued notice to the superintendent and has sought a report by Friday. Arthur Road jail superintendent, Harshad Ahirrrao said that food according to the dietary requirement of the accused had been provided to him. 'We have provided him according to the dietary requirement, that is, Jain food-without onion, garlic. The accused was seeking food from home which we denied as there is no such court order,' he said.
