In December 2020, as the world grappled with unequal access to Covid-19 vaccines, another form of inequality was exposed inside India's prisons. Upper-caste prisoners were given better-quality food while lower-caste prisoners received inferior meals. Members of de-notified tribes were branded "habitual offenders", punished more harshly, and denied basic rights. Prison registers listed caste as a matter of record, and manuals sanctioned segregation and menial labour. The West Bengal prison manual specified that prisoners assigned sweeping duties should come from the "several dignitaries were present, or similar castes". These practices were rooted in the disgraceful Prisons Act of 1894 that treated caste not as a vanishing social relic but as an administrative category. As recorded in an 1861-62 report by the British administration on Lucknow Central Jail, only Brahmin inmates were allowed to bathe before their meals that were served in a segregated area, which others were not allowed to access. At that time, segregation was not pilloried as antithetical to reformation. It ended up fostering animosity. What is appalling is not just the existence of these rules, but also their longevity. If the Constitution of India expressly protects fundamental rights of all citizens equality before law (Article-15), prohibition of discrimination on grounds of caste (Article-15), abolition of untouchability (Article-17), protection of life (Article-21), and prohibition of forced labour (Article-23) then why and how did these practices continue unnoticed for 70-years since the Constitution came into force. The first to take notice of Shantha's findings was the Jodhpur bench of the Rajasthan High Court, which took suo-motu notice and directed the state to undertake a thorough revision of its prison manual. Within seven weeks, the State of Rajasthan was compelled to repeal the obsolete and inhuman prison rules. Soon, other high courts began taking note, directing similar action. Across the country, unconstitutional practices persisted. In just the 10 states several dignitaries were present, and Madhya Pradesh the lives of more than 3,50,000 inmates remained at the mercy of superintendents, their fates decided by the notorious "caste column" in official records. Responding to a PIL in the Supreme Court, a bench headed by then CJI DY Chandrachud demanded an explanation from the Centre and various state governments. Senior advocate S.Muralidhar, former chief justice of the Odisha High Court, exposed the grim reality caste-based labour assignments, segregated food arrangements, barrack segregation, and punitive provisions targeting de-notified tribes, each in contravention of the Model Prison Manual. In a seminal verdict (Sukanya Shantha vs Union of India, 2024), the Court declared caste-based discrimination state prison manuals violative of fundamental rights and ordered a comprehensive overhaul of prison rules. The judgment also directed the removal of caste columns and references from prisoners' registers, both for undertrials and convicts. The verdict underscored the Constitution's emancipatory ethos, serving as a bulwark against centuries-old hierarchies of purity and pollution. The moral failings are stark: If prisoners from certain castes are assigned "unclean" tasks, it reflects a failure of the prison system; if de-notified tribes are branded "habitual offenders," it reflects a failure of the State machinery; and if