Criminalization of Poverty: Analysing Beggary and Vagrancy Laws in India

A society is not judged by how it treats the rich, but how it treats its poor.

In India’s buzzing metro cities, the contrast is disturbing. On one side, we have gleaming malls, large apartment complexes, and gated communities. On the other hand, we have children begging at traffic signals, elderly people napping on pavements, and vendors living where they work. However, instead of empathy, the law often meets poverty with handcuffs.

As India aims to be a 5-trillion-dollar economy and projects its digital competency to the world, a darker truth remains: poverty is still being criminalized.

The blog takes a critical and reformative viewpoint, highlighting how colonial-era laws, outdated policing practices, and a lack of welfare infrastructure lead to the sidelining and oppression of the poverty-driven people rather than their upliftment.

Colonial Legacy

Begging, loitering, and vagrancy, activities that are rooted in poverty, are still punishable acts in many parts of India. The Bombay Prevention of Begging Act, 1959 of Maharashtra, was also adopted by Gujarat and the National Capital Territory (NCT) of Delhi. According to the Ministry of Social Justice & Empowerment, 20 States and 2 Union Territories have anti-beggary laws that make begging illegal. These states include Bihar (Bihar Prevention of Begging Act, 1951), Madhya Pradesh (Madhya Pradesh Biksha Vritti Nivaran Adhiniyam, 1973), Goa (The Goa, Daman & Diu Prevention of Begging Act, 1972) Haryana (The Haryana Prevention of Begging Act, 1971), Uttar Pradesh (Uttar Pradesh Prohibition of Beggary Act, 1975), West Bengal (The Bengal Vagrancy Act, 1943), and Punjab (The Punjab Prevention of Begging Act, 1971), among others. The term “beggar” is so broadly defined under these acts that even a street performer or someone soliciting alms for survival may be arrested without a warrant. Offenders can be detained in so-called “begging homes” for up to 3 years.

Many states can invoke sections of the Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023, like Section 296 (obscene acts in public) and Section 292 (public nuisance), under the vague vagrancy laws, to detain the visibly poor. These laws were designed during the British era to cleanse public places. But why are we still living with them in 2025?

Recent Developments: A Glimmer of Change

In 2018, an activist, Harsh Mander, filed a public interest litigation (PIL) arguing that the Bombay Prevention of Begging Act criminalized poverty and violated fundamental rights. The Delhi High Court struck down penal provisions of the Act, calling them unconstitutional. The Court emphasized that poverty should never be treated as a crime and noted that, “The State simply cannot fail to provide for its most vulnerable and then criminalize them for being in that condition.”

More recently, in 2024, the Allahabad High Court, in response to a PIL filed by Advocate Jyoti Rajpoot, instructed the police to treat homeless individuals with dignity and respect, emphasizing humane treatment.

Nevertheless, these were regional verdicts, not a nationwide portrayal. In states like Maharashtra, Gujarat, and West Bengal, the old laws still prevail, and police continue to target the homeless, migrants, mentally ill, and street dwellers. In 2021, the Supreme Court rejected a PIL (Kush Kalra v. Union of India) that sought to prohibit beggars from public spaces during the COVID-19 pandemic. The Court recognized that begging is a socioeconomic issue, not a criminal act, and held that the State may regulate such matters.  However, there are no Supreme Court rulings so far that have struck down certain aspects of anti-beggary laws nationwide, but the constitutional validity of such laws could soon be tested, especially in the wake of the recent High Court judgments.

A Legal System that Punishes the Powerless

The core of the problem lies in disproportionate policing. The poor, being more visible on the streets, become easy targets for a system that often equates visibility with criminality.

This legal framework stands in striking contrast with Article 21 of the Indian Constitution, which guarantees the right to life and personal liberty.  The Supreme Court interprets the Article to also include dignity, shelter, and livelihood, such as in the case of Olga Tellis v. Bombay Municipal Corporation (1985).

Equally, Article 14 (equality before law) and Article 15 (prohibition of discrimination) are routinely violated when only certain classes of people—mainly the poor and marginalized—face the brunt of these outdated laws.

Moreover, India's international obligations under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR) appear unfulfilled in this context.  Article 9(1) of the ICCPR says everyone has the right to liberty and security of person. No one shall be subjected to arbitrary arrest or detention. Criminalizing begging and allowing arrest without a warrant can amount to arbitrary deprivation of liberty. UN Human Rights Committee (which monitors ICCPR) has stated that states must not criminalize life-sustaining acts of the poor (e.g., begging, sleeping in public) as this would violate rights to dignity and liberty. Article 11 of the ICCPR consents right to an adequate standard of living, including adequate food, clothing, and housing. The state is obliged to take steps to reduce poverty, homelessness, and hunger, not to criminalize people struggling with these.

Criminalizing survival strategies like begging and sleeping in public violates basic human dignity. India's anti-beggary laws are arguably inconsistent with these obligations.

Behind the Bars of “Beggar Homes”

State-run shelters, often thought of as safe havens for the vulnerable, rarely live up to that ideal. In reality, most beggar homes function more like jails. Reports of overcrowding, abuse, lack of medical care, and no real rehabilitation programs are common.

Ironically, these institutions often extend the same systemic poverty they claim to solve. Once detained, individuals often lose what little connections or livelihood they had, making their return to society even more difficult.

Post-Pandemic Crisis

The COVID-19 pandemic exposed and amplified these inequalities. During lockdowns, thousands of informal workers, street dwellers, and beggars lost access to food, work, and shelter. While many citizens stepped up to help, the law stood silent -or worse, hostile.

In cities like Mumbai and Delhi, many homeless people were picked up and detained under laws meant for public nuisance. The pandemic could have been a turning point for better policies, but instead, it showed just how deeply our system still punishes the poor for being poor.

What Can Be Done?

India doesn’t need more jails for the poor. It needs inclusive policies, sensitive policing, and laws that uphold human dignity. Instead of punishing people for being homeless or struggling to survive, we should focus on building a system that supports and uplifts them. This starts with getting rid of outdated beggary and vagrancy laws that treat poverty like a crime. These colonial-era rules don’t belong in today’s society, where we’re striving for equality and dignity for all.

We need to rethink how laws are made. Rather than writing laws that punish, we should create ones that help. That means focusing on things like job training, rehabilitation programs, and access to basic services like food, shelter, and healthcare. 

We must also strengthen existing programs, especially those under the National Urban Livelihoods Mission (NULM). The Shelter for Urban Homeless (SUH) scheme, for example, should go beyond just offering a roof—it should also connect people to healthcare, education, and legal help so they can truly get back on their feet.

Another key part of the solution is empowering the judiciary and civil society. PILs, community action, and judicial oversight can go a long way in making sure that reforms are not just written into law but actually practiced.

Finally, we need to train our police and public officials. They’re on the front lines, and their approach matters. A shift from rigid enforcement to empathy and understanding, guided by human rights principles, is essential for meaningful change.

Conclusion: Law Must Protect, Not Persecute

India’s approach to poverty within its legal system continues to criminalize acts of survival instead of addressing their root causes. These laws disproportionately target the poor, homeless, and vulnerable populations, often leading to arbitrary arrests, detention in inhumane “beggar homes”, and systemic elimination from society. Even though some High Court rulings have offered hope, the absence of nationwide reforms reflects a gap between constitutional ideals and ground-level realities.

In a country that wants to lead on the global stage, it is morally and legally unjustifiable to criminalize those already suffering. Poverty is not a crime; it’s a sign that the system has failed them. And the role of the law should be to fix that failure, not make it worse.

If India truly seeks to be a fair society, it must begin by decriminalizing its most vulnerable citizens and ensuring that human dignity is not a privilege for a few but a right for all.