PRISON PRIVILEGES ARE NOT RIGHTS: WHY THE DARSHAN JAIL ROW EXPOSES CELEBRITY ENTITLEMENT

 The public uproar over the denial of “special facilities” to Kannada film actor Darshan and his associates has exposed a troubling misconception about prisons, privilege, and the rule of law. The noise — amplified by supporters and emotional public statements — suggests that undertrial prisoners are legally entitled to comforts such as home-cooked food, private bedding, or other personal facilities, and that jail authorities are unlawfully denying them. This narrative is not only misleading but dangerous.

Indian prison law draws a clear line between rights and privileges. The Karnataka Prisons Act allows prison authorities to permit undertrial prisoners to receive certain items from private sources. The operative word is “permit”. It confers discretion, not entitlement. That discretion is further governed by the Karnataka Prisons and Correctional Services Manual, which exists precisely to ensure discipline, uniformity, and equality inside prisons.

In Darshan’s case, courts relied on the Prison Manual to reject demands for home food and personal comforts. The reasoning was simple: prisons are not hotels, and dignity does not mean luxury. Every undertrial accused of serious offences, including murder, is subject to the same rules — standard clothing, standard food, standard bedding. Granting exceptions based on celebrity status would amount to institutionalised discrimination against ordinary prisoners.

What makes this episode troubling is not the legal outcome, but the expectation behind the demand. The outrage appeared to assume that fame should soften incarceration, that influence should bend procedure, and that denial of preference equals violation of rights. Such thinking corrodes the very idea of equality before law.

Prison authorities did not act arbitrarily; they acted cautiously, aware that granting special privileges would invite legal scrutiny and public backlash for creating a “VIP jail” culture. Courts endorsed this caution, recognising that once privilege is mistaken for right, discipline collapses.

The Darshan jail row is therefore not about human rights violations. It is about resisting the normalisation of entitlement. In a constitutional democracy, prisons exist to uphold equality, not to mirror social hierarchy. The law demands fairness — not favour.