HC Deb 27 June 1881 vol 262 c1356
MR. T. C. THOMPSON

asked the Secretary of State for India, Whether prisoners in India ordered by the governors of prisons to be flogged have, in all cases, an opportunity of being heard in their defence before some person in authority independent of the prison executive?

THE MARQUESS OF HARTINGTON

The powers of a superintendent of gaols as to the infliction of corporal punishment for prison offences are regulated by different Acts for the various Presidencies, which Acts are supplemented by rules made by the local authorities. Throughout the Bengal Presidency, the superintendent is, by the Prisons Act 26, of 1870, empowered to order corporal punishment; but in case of repeated offences against prison discipline he is directed to bring the matter to the cognizance of a magistrate, who is empowered to hold an inquiry upon oath, and it is only in these cases that the prisoner has an opportunity of being heard before an independent authority. No corporal punishment is to be inflicted in any of the Presidencies except in the presence of the superintendent and with the sanction of the medical officer. I have already stated, in answer to the hon. Member for Dungarvan (Mr. O'Donnell), that the large number of corporal punishments in the gaols of Bengal has attracted the attention of the Governments of Bengal and of India; that Provisional Orders have been issued which have already had the effect of greatly diminishing their number; and that further inquiries have been instituted with the view of substituting, in many cases, a less objectionable form of punishment.