IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
K. LAKSHMAN, J.
Arelli Ashoka Bhai – Appellant
Versus
The State of Telangana and Ors. – Respondents
Writ Petition Nos.20421, 20425 & 20530 OF 2019, 18838, 19525, 20259, 21397, 21478, 21484, 21948, 21967 & 24490 OF 2020 AND 1463 OF 2021
Decided on : 01-06-2021
Constitution of India, 1950 - Article – 72 – Criminal Procedure Code,1973 - Section – 432 , 433 and 433A - Remission Policy - Grant of remission - Petitioners are kith and kin/close relatives of Lifers, who are languishing in different jails - Their grievance is that they are entitled for remission in accordance with Remission Policy and respondents’ authorities are not extending said benefit for the lifers in this batch of writ petition - Therefore, present writ petitions with different reliefs as sought therein- appropriate Government may, at any time, without Conditions or upon any conditions which person sentenced accepts, suspend execution of his sentence or remit whole or any part of punishment to which he has been sentenced - Whenever an application is made to appropriate Government for suspension or remission of a sentence, appropriate Government may require presiding Judge of Court before or by which conviction was had or confirmed, to state his opinion as to whether application should be granted or refused, together with his reasons for such opinion and also to forward with statement of such opinion a certified copy of record of trial or of such record thereof as exists - Whether application should be granted or refused, together with his reasons for such opinion and also to forward with statement of such opinion a certified copy of record of trial or of such record thereof as exists– Held, respondent No.1 is directed to comply with orders passed by this Court in above batch of writ petitions within time stipulated, failing which it will be viewed seriously - Liberty is also granted to petitioners to move contempt proceedings in event of non-compliance of orders passed by Court within time stipulated by this Court - Respondent No.1 shall consider principle laid down by Apex Court and various other High Courts referred supra with regard to various issues viz., remission policy as on date of conviction of accused, educational qualifications, more particularly higher qualifications acquired by life-convicts while serving out imprisonment, triple factors stated above, conduct of life-convicts and other aspects stated above - Respondent No.1 shall also keep in mind while considering the applications of life-convicts aim and object of remission and remission policy - Accordingly, W.P. Nos.20421, 20425 and 20530 of 2019 are disposed of.
ORDER :
Heard Ms. Pushpinder Kaur and Mr. P. Shashi Kiran, learned counsel appearing for the respective petitioners in this batch of writ petitions, and the learned Government Pleader for Home appearing on behalf of the respondents.
1. CHALLENGE:
Kith and Kin/Close relatives of Lifers filed all these present Writ Petitions for grant of remission, comply with the orders passed by this Court in earlier writ petition, a direction to the respondents’ authorities to recommend the names of lifers for grant of special remission in terms of remission policy.
2. INTRODUCTION:
i) Lis involved in this batch of writ petitions is almost same, contentions of petitioners and respondents are also common and, therefore, this batch of writ petitions is heard together and disposed of by way of this common order.
ii) The petitioners are kith and kin/close relatives of the Lifers, who are languishing in different jails. Their grievance is that they are entitled for remission in accordance with the Remission Policy and the respondents’ authorities are not extending the said benefit for the lifers in this batch of writ petition. Therefore, the present writ petitions with different reliefs as sought therein.
3. RELEVANT PROVISIONS/ARTICLES OF THE INDIAN PENAL CODE, 1860 (IPC) THE CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, 1973 (Cr.P.C.), AND THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA:
i) To decide the lis in this batch of writ petitions, the following provisions of the Cr.P.C., IPC and the Constitution of India are relevant which are as under:
INDIAN PENAL CODE:
“55. Commutation of sentence of imprisonment for life.-In every case in which sentence of imprisonment for life shall have been passed, the appropriate Government may, without the consent of the offender, commute the punishment for imprisonment of either description for a term not exceeding fourteen years.”
“57. Fractions of terms of punishment.-In calculating fractions of terms of punishment, imprisonment for life shall be reckoned as equivalent to imprisonment for twenty years.”
CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE:
“432. Power to suspend or remit sentences.
(1) When any person has been sentenced to punishment for an offence, the appropriate Government may, at any time, without Conditions or upon any conditions which the person sentenced accepts, suspend the execution of his sentence or remit the whole or any part of the punishment to which he has been sentenced.
(2) Whenever an application is made to the appropriate Government for the suspension or remission of a sentence, the appropriate Government may require the. presiding Judge of the Court before or by which the conviction was had or confirmed, to state his opinion as to whether the application should be granted or refused, together with his reasons for such opinion and also to forward with the statement of such opinion a certified copy of the record of the trial or of such record thereof as exists.
(3) If any condition on which a sentence has been suspended or remitted is, In the opinion of the appropriate Government, not fulfilled, the appropriate Government may cancel the suspension or remission, and thereupon the person in whose favour the sentence has been suspended or remitted may, if at large, be arrested by any police officer, without warrant and remanded to undergo the unexpired portion of the sentence.
(4) The condition on which a sentence is suspended or remitted under this section may be one to be fulfilled by the person in whose favour the sentence is suspended or remitted, or one independent of his will.
(5) The appropriate Government may, by general rules or special orders give directions as to the suspension of sentences and the conditions on which petitions should be presented and dealt with: Provided that in the case of any sentence (other than a sentence of fine) passed on a male person above the age of eighteen years, no such petition by the person sentenced or by a
Ashok Kumar Barik v. State of Orissa
Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar [(2014) 8 SCC 273]
Bachan Singh v. State of Punjab
Laxman Naskar v. Union of India
Shri Niwas v. Delhi Administration
Shatrughan Chauhan v. Union of India
State of Haryana v. Jagdish and Harpal
Swami Shraddananda v. State of Karnataka
State of Haryana v. Mahender Singh
Point of law : Life convict - Remission policy as on the date of conviction of accused, educational qualifications, more particularly higher qualifications acquired by the life-convicts while serving....
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, reo....
The discretion to suspend or remit the sentence lies with the State Government, but the decision must be in accordance with the law and not arbitrary. The opinion of the Presiding Judge must fulfill ....
Life imprisonment entails incarceration for life unless remission is granted under Section 432 of Cr.P.C.; prisoners do not have an automatic right to release after a fixed term.
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.