The following acts are declared to be prison-offences when committed by a prisoner :—
(1) such wilful disobedience to any regulation of the prison as shall have been declared by rules made under section 59 to be a prison-offence ;
(2) any assault or use of criminal force ;
(3) the use of insulting or threatening language ;
(4) immoral or indecent or disorderly behaviour ;
(5) wilfully disabling himself from labour ;
(6) contumaciously refusing to work ;
(7) filling, cutting, altering or removing handcuffs, fetters or bars without due authority ;
(8) wilful idleness or negligence at work by any prisoner sentenced to rigorous imprisonment ;
(9) wilful mismanagement of work by any prisoner sentenced to rigorous imprisonment ;
(10) wilful damage to prison-property ;
(11) tampering with or defacing history-tickets, records or documents ;
(12) receiving, possessing or transferring any prohibited article ;
(13) feigning illness ;
(14) wilfully bringing a false accusation against any officer or prisoner ;
(15) omitting or refusing to report, as soon as it comes to his knowledge, the occurrence of any fire, any plot or conspiracy, any escape, attempt or preparation to escape, and any attack or preparation for attack upon any prisoner or prison-official ; and
(16) conspiring to escape, or to assist in escaping, or to commit any other of the offences aforesaid.
SYNOPSIS
1. Prison vices. Imposed without prior opportunity of hearing. 2. Punishment not to be
1. Prison vices.- Jail authority need not take action against the prisoners indulging in vices but in the situation in which they are placed a sympathetic approach is also required. [Rama Murthy v. State of Karnataka, 1997 Cri Lj 1508 at 1517 (SC) : AIR 1997 SC 1739 : 1997 AIR SCW 929].
2. Punishment not to be imposed without prior opportunity of hearing.- The District and Session Judge shall ensure that as and when the Prison Authority forward any papers pertaining to punishment for this confirmation. The concerned prisoner is kept present before him and given an opportunity of making representation against the proposed punishment of which confirmation is sought. [Muktaram Sitaram Shinde v. State of Maharastra, 1997 Cri Lj 3458 at 3463 (Bom).]