Prisoners retain their fundamental rights to freedom of thought and expression, including the right to publish works, unless content is demonstrably harmful or unlawful.

JUDGMENT :

V.G. ARUN, J.

1. The petitioner is undergoing incarceration pursuant to his conviction for offences under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 (UAPA for short) and the Indian Penal Code, 1860. Utilising the period gainfully, the petitioner successfully completed Master's program in History from the Indira Gandhi National Open University and is currently pursuing Masters in M.A. Philosophy and M.A. Malayalam. The petitioner has written a book titled 'Bandhitharude Ormakurippukal' (Memoirs of the Incarcerated) and has applied for permission to publish the book. The Superintendent of the Prison has forwarded petitioner's application and the manuscript of the books along with his recommendation, to the 2^nd respondent–Director General of Prisons and Correctional Services. This writ petition is filed aggrieved by the inordinate delay in taking a decision on petitioner's request.

2. Heard, Adv. Kaleeswaram Raj for the petitioner and Senior Government Pleader Smt.Amminikutty for the State.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the Kerala Prisons and Correctional Services (Management) Act, 2010 (for short' the Act'), does not contain any provision prohibiting the publication of literary works of prisoners. On the other hand, clause (a) of Section 36 of the Act guarantees the right to live with human dignity to every prisoner, while clause (f) grants protection against unreasonable discrimination and clause (k) ensures enjoyment of fundamental rights under Part III of the Constitution of India, insofar as they do not become incapable of enjoyment as an incident of conviction and confinement. The right to live with human dignity and enjoy fundamental rights encompasses the right to freedom of thought and expression. Moreover, curtailment of the right militates against the reformative and rehabilitative purposes of the Act. The learned Counsel alleged that the petitioner is being discriminated in the matter of publication of his book, as many other prisoners are granted permission to publish their work.

Relying on the decision of the Apex Court in State of Maharashtra v. Prabhkar Pandurang Sanzgiri and Another , AIR 1966 SC 424, it is argued that the rights guaranteed to prisoners include the right to publish their works, if the content is not against national interest and does not contain other deleterious material.

4. According to the learned Government Pleader, the Government is not standing in the way of the petitioner publishing his book. At the same time, the petitioner being guilty of offences under the UAPA, before granting permission, it has to be ascertained whether the contents of the book violate any provisions of the UAPA or contains defamatory, derogatory or sensitive material requiring redaction. Even though UAPA does not expressly prohibit publication of books, in view of the wide definition of 'unlawful activity' under Section 2(o), the contents of the book have to be verified to ensure that they do not promote or incite violence, hatred or disaffection, glorify unlawful ideology or further the objectives of any banned organisation. Therefore, in the petitioner's case, the Government will take a decision after detailed scrutiny of the manuscript, which process will take at least three months.

5. As rightly contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the fundamental rights of prisoners are not completely taken away upon conviction. By reason of the conviction, a person is not reduced to a non-person and his rights made subject to the whims of the prison administration. Their enjoyment of fundamental rights under Part III of the Const