"Prisons" being a State subject has hindered uniform prison reform. Discuss in light of the Model Prisons and Correctional Services Act, 2023.

"Prisons" and "persons detained therein" fall under Entry 4, List II of the Seventh Schedule, so each State runs its own prisons [1]. As a result, prison law has stayed fragmented and anchored in the colonial Prisons Act, 1894. The Model Prisons and Correctional Services Act, 2023 tries to bridge this gap through cooperative federalism [1].

How State-subject status hinders uniform reform

• The Centre can only advise: MHA states that prison administration, including overcrowding, is the responsibility of States and UTs. Its letters are guidance, not binding directions [2].
• The same advice keeps repeating: MHA flagged overcrowding and undertrial detention in May 2011 [3]. It sent fresh advisories again in 2024–25 on applying Section 479, BNSS [2][8].
• Central schemes are implemented unevenly: MHA itself called State implementation of the Support to Poor Prisoners Scheme inadequate in December 2025 [4]. The Parliamentary Standing Committee on Home Affairs found that few prisoners had benefited [5].
• States differ widely: In 2022, occupancy was 184.5% in Delhi but 77.3% in Tamil Nadu [6]. National occupancy was still 120.8% in 2023 [7].
• Enforcement depends on State staff: Section 479(3) makes the jail Superintendent responsible for applying for an undertrial's release [8]. How well this happens depends on each State's staffing.

Model Prisons Act, 2023: a cooperative-federal template

• MHA circulated it to States and UTs to replace the Prisons Act 1894, Prisoners Act 1900 and Transfer of Prisoners Act 1950 [1].
• It shifts the focus from punishment to correction: classifying and separating prisoners, separate facilities for women and transgender prisoners, parole/furlough, open and semi-open institutions, and technology for security [1].
• It respects federalism, because States can adapt it to local needs.

Limits of the model-law route

• It is not binding. It takes effect only if a State legislature enacts it [1].
• Without incentives or monitoring, it risks the same fate as earlier advisories [3][4].

Being a State subject has produced a patchwork of prison laws. The 2023 Model Act shows that common standards can still be reached through cooperation rather than centralisation. Linking modernisation grants to adoption, and publishing State-wise data on adoption and outcomes, would turn the template into practice. That would uphold the Article 21 guarantee of dignity in custody and SDG 16 on access to justice.