Inadequate Explanation Under Section 313 CrPC Cannot Be Foundation For Conviction If Prosecution Fails To Prove Case: Allahabad High Court No-Confidence Motion In Housing Societies Fails If 2/3 Majority Not Met; Fractions In Voting Threshold Cannot Be Rounded Down: Bombay High Court Successor Rent Controller Cannot Re-Appreciate Evidence Or Act As Appellate Court Under Review Jurisdiction: Delhi High Court Restores Eviction Order Article 21 Overrides PMLA Section 45 Rigors In Cases Of Unduly Long Incarceration Without Trial: Calcutta High Court Grants Bail To SSC Scam ‘Middleman’ Unregistered Family Partition Deed Recording Past Oral Arrangement Doesn't Require Compulsory Registration: Gujarat High Court Private Banks Acting As Authorised Dealers Under FEMA Amenable To Writ Jurisdiction; Can Refuse Transactions For 'Sanctions-Related' Concerns: Gauhati High Court Non-Examination Of Investigating Officer Not Fatal To Prosecution Case If Eyewitness Testimony Is Credible & Trustworthy: Jharkhand High Court Mere Denial Of Signature Insufficient When Execution Is Proved Through Endorsements: Karnataka High Court Restores Specific Performance Decree Sectarianism Claims Can't Discredit Reliable Testimony Of Child Sexual Abuse Victim: Kerala High Court Upholds Madrassa Teacher's Conviction State Must Prove Specific 'Public Interest' To Exempt Projects From Social Impact Assessment Under Section 10A Land Acquisition Act: Telangana High Court Or 2 Rule 2 CPC |Failure To Seek Specific Performance In Earlier Injunction Suit Bars Subsequent Claim; Readiness & Willingness Must Be Continuous: Madras High Court Exoneration In Departmental Proceedings Does Not Result In Automatic Discharge In Criminal Case: Orissa High Court History Sheet Can Be Opened On 'Reasonable Belief' Even Without Conviction, But Must Be Reviewed After 7 Years Of Good Conduct: Rajasthan High Court

"Overemphasis on Presiding Judge's Opinion Undermines Concept of Remission," Rules Supreme Court

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a landmark judgment, the Supreme Court of India has criticized the Remission Board for its "overemphasis on the presiding judge's opinion," stating that it undermines the concept of remission as a reward for reformation. The court emphasized that such an approach "strikes at the heart, and subvert the concept of remission – as a reward and incentive encouraging actions and behaviour geared towards reformation – in a modern legal system."

The bench, comprising Justices S. Ravindra Bhat and Prashant Kumar Mishra, delivered the judgment on August 25, 2023, in a writ petition filed under Article 32 of the Indian Constitution. The petitioner, serving a life sentence for triple murder, sought premature release after 24 years of actual imprisonment without remission or parole.

The court observed that the Remission Board had failed to consider other authorities like the Probation Officer and Jail Superintendent, who are "in a far better position to comment on his post-conviction reformation." The court further cautioned against potential biases in police reports, especially when the victims are police personnel, stating that "such biases should not be determinative."

Supreme court directed the Remission Board and the presiding judge to reconsider the petitioner's application for premature release. The court advised the board to make its decision within three months and directed the presiding judge to provide a new opinion within one month.

Date of Decision:  August 25, 2023

RAJO @ RAJWA @ RAJENDRA MANDAL vs THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS.

[gview file="https://lawyer-e-news.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/25-Aug-2023_Rajo_Vs_State_Of_Bihar.pdf"]

Latest Legal News