Remission of sentence is a discretionary power that must be exercised fairly and non-arbitrarily; rejection based solely on a negative recommendation of a review board without considering favorable reports or providing cogent reasons is arbitrary and violative of Article 14.

(Cause title taken from Case Information System)

Digitally signed by VED PRAKASH DEWANGAN Date: 2026.05.15 10:50:14 +0530

Order on Board

Per Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice

1. Heard Mr. Chitendra Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner, and Dr. Saurabh Kumar Pande, learned Deputy Advocate General appearing on behalf of the respondents/State.

2. By way of the present writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has called in question the legality, validity and propriety of the order dated 06.04.2026 passed by respondent No.3/Under Secretary, Chhattisgarh State Jail Department, whereby the application preferred by the petitioner seeking premature release/remission of remaining jail sentence under Rule 358 of the Chhattisgarh Prison Rules, 1968 has been rejected on the basis of the negative recommendation of the State Sentence Review Board.

3. The petitioner has filed the present petition with the following prayer:-

“

10.1 It is, therefore, prayed that this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to call for the entire records pertaining to the case of petitioner.

10.2 That, the Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to set aside the order dated 06/04/2026 (Annexure P/1) passed by respondent No. 3 (Under Secretary, C.G. State Jail Department) and may kindly direct the Respondent authorities to consider the application for grant of remission of the remaining jail sentence of the Petitioner.

10.3 Further, the Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct respondent authorities for releasing the petitioner under the provision of Section 432 of Cr.P.C. (as amended Section 473 of B.N.S.S, 2023) or as per other existing provision of law.

10.4 That, Any other relief which may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case, may also be granted in the interest of justice.”

4. Facts of the case, in brief, are that the petitioner was convicted for offences punishable under Sections 302 and 302/34 of the IPC and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life along with fine of Rs.5,000/- each, with default stipulation, by judgment dated 29.10.2011 passed in Special Case No.01/2011 by the learned Special Judge, Kabirdham (Kawardha), District Kabirdham (C.G.). Against the said judgment of conviction and sentence, the petitioner preferred Criminal Appeal No.18/2012 before this Court, which came to be dismissed vide judgment dated 16.09.2017 affirming the conviction and sentence awarded by the learned trial Court. Thereafter, the Special Leave Petition (Criminal) Diary No.27394/2019 preferred by the petitioner before the Hon’ble Supreme Court also came to be dismissed on 06.12.2019.

5. Further case of the petitioner is that respondent No.4/Director General Prisons issued a communication dated 18.03.2024 for placing the cases of eligible life convicts before the State Sentence Review Board for consideration of premature release. Pursuant thereto, the petitioner submitted an application dated 05.06.2025 before respondent No.6/Jail Superintendent, Central Jail, Durg seeking grant of remission/premature release. The said application was forwarded along with favourable recommendation under prescribed Proforma ‘A’ and also with no objection/recommendation of the learned trial Court dated 22.03.2025. However, respondent No.3, by the impugned order dated 06.04.2026, rejected the claim of the petitioner for premat