IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
P.B.SURESH KUMAR, JOBIN SEBASTIAN, JJ
Prasanna W/o. Rajan – Appellant
Versus
State Of Kerala, Represented By Public Prosecutor – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
P.B.Suresh Kumar, J.
The questions that arise for consideration in these matters are common and as such, they are disposed of by this common judgement. For a proper adjudication of the questions, a clear articulation of the facts involved in the matters is essential.
W.A.No.1245 of 2024
2. The appellant is the petitioner in the writ petition from which the appeal arises. Her husband is undergoing imprisonment for life pursuant to his conviction under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) for having committed the murder of one Geetha, with whom he was having an illicit relationship. The convict has undergone 22 years, 3 months and 19 days of imprisonment as on 10.06.2024 and has also earned a remission of 6 years, 3 months and 22 days. The period of sentence of the convict inclusive of remission would workout to be approximately 29 years. Although the case of the convict is being recommended by the Advisory Committee constituted under Section 77(1) of the Kerala Prisons and Correctional Services (Management) Act, 2010 (the Act) for premature release from the year 2017 onwards, the same is not being accepted by the Government. The appellant, in the circumstances, preferre




The court ruled that blanket exclusions from premature release based on the nature of the crime are arbitrary and violate principles of reformation, directing the Government to reconsider individual ....
(1) Remission policy prevailing on the date of conviction, is to be applied in a given case, and if a more liberal policy exists on the day of consideration, then latter would apply.(2) Blanket exclu....
The court emphasized that the decision for premature release must consider individual circumstances and cannot be arbitrarily denied based on the nature of the crime.
The court mandated the reconsideration of a convict's premature release proposal, emphasizing rehabilitation, age, and new evidence over the initial decision to reject it based on the severity of the....
The government must provide proper reasoning for rejecting applications for premature release, ensuring uniformity and adherence to established policies.
The court emphasized that the Government must provide consistent and reasoned decisions regarding premature release applications, ensuring compliance with established policies and avoiding arbitrary ....
The court emphasized that the Government must provide consistent and reasoned decisions for premature release applications, ensuring compliance with established policies and avoiding arbitrary reject....
The policy in effect at the time of conviction must be the primary consideration for determining premature release, unless a more liberal policy is subsequently adopted.
The Government must provide consistent and reasoned decisions when rejecting applications for premature release of convict prisoners, ensuring compliance with natural justice principles.
The exercise of executive power of clemency is a duty vested in the Authority for the welfare of the people, and the case of premature release of a life convict is governed by the policy/guidelines o....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.