Prisoner’s Request To Publish Book Cannot Be Denied Absent Deleterious Or Harmful Content: Kerala High Court
The High Court held that neither the Prisons Act nor the Rules contain any prohibition against publication and that prisoners continue to enjoy fundamental rights subject only to lawful restrictions.
Justice V.G. Arun, Kerala High Court
The Kerala High Court has held that a prisoner’s request to publish a literary work cannot be rejected in the absence of any deleterious or harmful content, while observing that the governing prison legislation and rules do not authorise a blanket prohibition on publication by prisoners.
The Court was hearing a writ petition challenging the delay on the part of the authorities in deciding on the petitioner’s application seeking permission to publish a manuscript written during incarceration.
A Bench comprising Justice V.G. Arun, upon hearing the matter, observed: “The Kerala Prisons and Correctional Services (Management) Act or the corresponding Rules also do not contain any provision empowering the prison authorities or the Government to interdict a prisoner from publishing his literary work. On the other hand, as per Rule 254 of the Kerala Prisons and Correctional Services (Management) Rules, 2014, the Superintendent can permit prisoners to read till 9 pm or till such time the Superintendent deems appropriate. The prisoners are also permitted to write down excerpts from books or newspapers”.
The above measures, the Bench remarked, “are intended to further the corrective and reformative purposes of the Act”, while concluding that “the petitioner's request to publish his book cannot be denied in the absence of deleterious or harmful content”.
Advocate Kaleeswaram Raj appeared on behalf of the petitioner, while Senior Government Pleader Amminikutty appeared on behalf of the respondents.
Background
The petitioner, who is undergoing imprisonment following conviction under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act and the Indian Penal Code, completed academic programmes while in custody and subsequently authored a manuscript titled Bandhitharude Ormakurippukal.
He applied for permission to publish the work, and the Superintendent forwarded the request along with the manuscript and a favourable recommendation to the higher authorities.
The petitioner approached the Court complaining of inordinate delay. It was contended that the Kerala Prisons and Correctional Services (Management) Act, 2010, contains no restriction on the publication of literary works by prisoners, and that denial without a statutory basis violates the prisoner’s right to dignity and expression.
The State submitted that publication would be permitted after examination of the contents to ensure that no material falls afoul of the UAPA or other legal restrictions, and that the scrutiny process would require several months.
Court’s Observation
The Kerala High Court, at the outset, highlighted that the fundamental rights of prisoners do not stand extinguished upon conviction. It held that a person in custody is “not reduced to a non-person and his rights made subject to the whims of the prison administration” and that restrictions arise only where rights become incapable of enjoyment as an incident of conviction.
Discussing the nature of expressive freedom, the Court observed that thoughts and ideas remain beyond external control but become examinable when converted into written form. It emphasised that such scrutiny, though permissible, cannot serve as an insurmountable barrier to publication. The bench observed that “for prisoners like the petitioner, the examination can be stricter, but never an insurmountable obstacle.”
The Bench further relied on the Supreme Court decision in State of Maharashtra v. Prabhakar Pandurang Sanzgiri, where it was held that in the absence of an express prohibition, a detenu could not be prevented from publishing a book. The extract reproduced in the judgment emphasises that restrictions on liberty must have statutory backing and that publication cannot be denied merely because the author is incarcerated.
The Court also noted that the Kerala Prisons and Correctional Services (Management) Act, 2010 and the corresponding Rules contain no provision empowering authorities to prevent publication of literary work.
Instead, the Bench stated, the Rules encourage reading and writing as part of the reformative framework. Rule 254 permits prisoners to read and to write excerpts from material available to them. The Court held that these provisions collectively indicate a legislative intent to support rehabilitation.
Accordingly, the Bench concluded that while authorities may examine the manuscript to ensure that it does not promote unlawful activity or contain objectionable content, there is no basis to withhold permission unless such material is actually found.
Conclusion
Accordingly, the writ petition was disposed of with a direction to the State to decide on the petitioner’s application for permission to publish his manuscript within three months.
The authorities were directed to consider the application in light of the Supreme Court precedent and the observations in the judgment.
Cause Title: Roopesh T.R. v. State of Kerala & Others (Neutral Citation: 2025:KER:82711)
Appearances
Petitioner: Advocates Kaleeswaram Raj, Thulasi K Raj, Aparna Narayan Menon and Others
Respondents: Senior Government Pleader Amminikutty
