2026 Supreme(Pat) 85

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
JITENDRA KUMAR, J.
Md Sultan, Son of Md. Habib, Resident of Village  - Appellant 
Versus
The State of Bihar through Chief Secretary, Govt. Of Bihar, Patna. – Respondent
Criminal Writ Jurisdiction Case No.924 of 2021
Advocate Appeared : 
Decided On : 10-02-2026

Rejection of life convicts' remission based on superseded notification illegal where offenses not prohibited under current prison manual; board must holistically assess reformation, jail conduct, reoffending risk beyond crime gravity after 14+ years custody.

Headnote:

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 – Section 432 [Section 473 of BNSS] – Bihar Prison Manual, 2012 – Rules 474, 478 and 481 – Remission in sentence – Premature release of life convicts – Reformative approach of criminal justice system – Petitioners were convicted and sentenced to imprisonment for life for offences under Sections 364-A/149/120-B IPC and 368/149/120-B IPC – Remission schemes constitute an important component of reformative and rehabilitative approach of modern Penology, enabling reformed prisoners to reintegrate into society as useful members and providing incentive for good conduct in prison – After enforcement of Bihar Prison Manual, 2012, eligibility and procedure for premature release of life convicts are governed by Rules 474, 478 and 481 of Jail Manual – Earlier Notification No. 3106 dated 10.12.2002, which amended Rule 529 of old Jail Manual, ceased to have statutory force and could not be relied upon to deny remission – Under Rule 481 of Bihar Prison Manual, 2012, offences under Sections 364-A and 368 IPC are not included in category of offences for which premature release is prohibited – Rejection of petitioners' applications by applying the obsolete notification was arbitrary and illegal – Where prisoners have undergone more than 23 years of custody, have demonstrated reformed conduct and there is no material indicating likelihood of re-offending, continued incarceration would serve no fruitful purpose and case deserves reconsideration under remission policy – Petitioners are also at fag end of their life – Remission Board directed to reconsider petitioners' cases for remission afresh in accordance with law by 15th May 2026. (Paras 45, 46, 47, 57, 59, 60 and 61)

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 – Section 432 [Section 473 of BNSS] – Remission in sentence – Grant of remission to prisoner is a facet of reformatory aspect of our criminal justice system – Prisons are correctional and reformatory centres for adults convicts, as there are Observation Homes for juveniles in conflict with law – While considering premature release, Remission Board must examine factors such as: (i) circumstances in which offence was committed; (ii) likelihood of recurrence of crime; (iii) whether convict has lost potentiality to commit crime; (iv) whether continued incarceration serves any useful purpose; and (v) socio-economic condition of convict's family – Board must also give due weight to opinion of Jail authorities, who are best placed to assess reformation and conduct of prisoners during incarceration – Opinion of Trial Court or police authorities cannot be mechanically treated as decisive, particularly when such reports merely reiterate circumstances of crime and fail to consider post-conviction conduct and reformation of prisoner. (Paras 52, 53, 55, 56, 57 and 60)