18 February 2025 Bail and Antcipatory Bail >> Criminal Law  

The Supreme Court of India has issued a comprehensive judgment clarifying the powers of appropriate governments to grant remission of sentences under the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) and the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS). The court has mandated that states and union territories formulate clear policies on remission and ensure that orders granting or rejecting remission are reasoned and communicated to convicts.

The judgment addresses critical issues surrounding the exercise of remission powers, including the necessity of applications, the nature of conditions imposed, the revocation of remission, and the requirement of recording reasons.

Key Directives and Clarifications:

• Policy Mandate:
  • States and union territories with existing premature release guidelines must proactively consider eligible convicts without requiring specific applications.
  • Those without such policies must formulate them within two months to ensure fairness and prevent arbitrary decisions.
• Conditional Remission:
  • Appropriate governments can impose reasonable conditions on remission orders, aiming to rehabilitate convicts and ensure public safety.
  • Conditions must be practical, non-oppressive, and clearly defined, considering factors like the nature of the crime, the convict's background, and societal impact.
• Revocation of Remission:
  • Remission cannot be revoked without providing the convict an opportunity to be heard and a reasoned show-cause notice detailing the breach of conditions.
  • Minor breaches should not automatically lead to revocation, and the severity of the breach must be considered.
• Reasoned Orders:
  • Orders granting or rejecting remission must include brief, clear reasons to ensure transparency and enable convicts to understand the decision.
  • Convicts must be informed of their right to challenge rejection orders, and copies of these orders must be provided to District Legal Services Authorities for potential legal aid.
• NALSA SOP Implementation:
  • District Legal Services Authorities are directed to implement the National Legal Services Authority (NALSA) Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) on premature release rigorously.
  • The NALSA is requested to add to the SOP, the requirement of informing convicts that they have the right to challenge the rejection of premature release.
• Presiding Officer's Duty:
  • When the presiding officer's opinion is sought, it must be provided promptly, given the liberty of the convict is at stake.
• DLSA monitoring:
  • District Legal Services Authorities are tasked with monitoring the implementation of the proactive consideration of eligible convicts, and State Legal Services Authorities are encouraged to create a real time data portal.

Significance of the Judgment:

This judgment aims to streamline and standardize the remission process, ensuring fairness, transparency, and accountability. By mandating clear policies and reasoned orders, the Supreme Court seeks to prevent arbitrary decisions and protect the fundamental rights of convicts. The emphasis on NALSA's SOP and the role of legal services authorities underscores the importance of providing legal aid and support to prisoners. This decision reinforces the judiciary's commitment to upholding the rule of law and ensuring that the power of remission is exercised responsibly.

BHARATIYA NAGARIK SURAKSHA SANHITA, 2023

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973