PATNA HIGH COURT
I. A. Ansari, ACJ. And Chakradhari Sharan Singh, J.
Tarachand Kapari @ Taranand Kapari
@ Karo Kapri —Petitioner
versus
State of Bihar & Ors. —Respondents
Criminal Writ Jurisdiction Case No.1042 of 2015
Decided on 19.1.2016

IMPORTANT POINT
Release of a prisoner condemned to death, in exercise of powers conferred under Section 432 or Section 433 of Cr.P.C., does not amount to interference with due and proper course of justice.

Headnote:(A) Criminal Procedure Code, 1973—Sections 432, 433 and 433A read with Section 428—Indian Penal Code, 1860—Sections 54 and 302—Murder—Remission/commutation of sentence—Remission of punishment assumes that conviction is correct and only reduces punishment in part or in whole—Remission of sentence does not mean acquittal and aggrieved party has every right to vindicate himself or herself that his conviction is not sustainable in law—Commutation of sentence is not same as remission of sentence inasmuch as commutation is conversion or alteration of a sentence into another form of sentence, such as, a sentence of death into a sentence of imprisonment for life as prescribed by IPC or conversion or alteration of a sentence of imprisonment for life into a sentence of imprisonment for any other term. (Paras 17 and 20)

       (B) Criminal Procedure Code, 1973—Sections 432, 433 and 433A read with Section 428—Indian Penal Code, 1860—Sections 54 and 302—Murder—Remission/commutation of sentence—Cr.P.C. does not empower any Government to revise a judgment of conviction or sentence passed by court—Release of a prisoner condemned to death, in exercise of powers conferred under Section 432 or Section 433 of Cr.P.C., does not amount to interference with due and proper course of justice inasmuch as power of High Court to pronounce upon validity, propriety and correctness of conviction and sentence remains unaffected—By reducing sentence, Government concerned does not thereby modify judicial sentence—Fact that a sentence was remitted by appropriate Government or that on account of certain remission (which a convict earned under Jail Rules or under some order of general amnesty), does not, in any manner, dilute his conviction but merely reduces period of his sentence—Disqualifications which such a convict may have incurred due to his conviction under any other laws, such as, Election Laws, would remain unaltered even if such a convicted person’s sentence is remitted by appropriate Government—Since petitioner has already undergone 14 years of imprisonment, if his custodial period prior to his conviction, is taken into account, it is necessary for State Government to consider petitioner’s case for remission of sentence and, if upon such consideration, State Government decides to remit his sentence of imprisonment for life to a sentence of imprisonment for a term not exceeding 14 years and, then and then, only question of release of the petitioner by granting him remission by appropriate Government would arise—Writ petition disposed of with a direction to appropriate Government to consider petitioner’s case under Section 433 of Cr.P.C. (Paras 22, 103 and 104)

       (C) Criminal Procedure Code, 1973—Sections 432, 433 and 433A read with Section 428—Indian Penal Code, 1860—Sections 54 and 302—Remission/commutation of sentence—In order that a life convict may get benefit of set off in view of specified period of detention undergone during trial, it is necessary that his sentence be, first, commuted in exercise of powers by an appropriate Government under Section 433 of Cr.P.C. or appropriate Government decides to remit his entire sentence—There is no rule which vests an indefeasible right in a prisoner sentenced to imprisonment for life, to an unconditional release on expiry of a particular term—Question of remission remains exclusively within province of appropriate Government—Contention of petitioner that he ought to have been released from imprisonment by appropriate Government on completion of a period of 14 years of imprisonment, is not tenable in law inasmuch as petitioner has no indefeasible right to demand his release automatically on completion of a period of 14 years or for a period of 20 years on ground of commutation or remission unless Government chooses to invoke provisions of remission in favour of petitioner— Notwithstanding fact that Section 57 of IPC makes imprisonment for life equivalent to imprisonment for a term of 20 years, in no circumstances, life convict can be released before he completes a period of 20 years of imprisonment. (Paras 40, 50, 51 and 55)

       (D) Criminal Procedure Code, 1973—Sections 432, 433 and 433A read with Section 428—Indian Penal Code, 1860—Sections 54 and 302—Remission/commutation of sentence—Instead of imposition of death penalty, it is permissible for court, while awarding sentence of life imprisonment, to order that sentence so imposed shall amount to imprisonment for whole span of life of convicted person without any application of statutory provisions of remission and/or that a life convict shall undergo imprisonment till end of his natural life without statutory provisions of remission being applicable thereto. (Paras 86 and 87)

       (E) Bihar Prison Manual, 2012—Rule 453—Running of sentence—Imprisonment in default of payment of fine which is a penalty, would be consecutive and not concurrent—It would be calculated after convict serves out substantive term of punishment and in case of life imprisonment, where no default sentence for fine is given owing to principle “life means the rest of convict’s life”, fine is payable and recoverable in terms of Section 421 of Cr.P.C. (Para 102)

       Result: Writ Petition disposed of with directions.