“Overemphasis on Presiding Judge’s Opinion Undermines Concept of Remission,” Rules Supreme Court
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.
