SC's Direction on Remission

• 26 Feb 2025

For Prelims: Remission, Pardoning Power of the President, Article 72, President, Supreme Court, Article 161, Governor, Prison Act, 1894, Kehar Singh vs. Union of India (1989), Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC). 

For Mains: SC Directions on Remission, Remission Rules in India and Related Constitutional and Legal  Provisions. 

Source: TH 

Why in News? 

The Supreme Court (SC) issued guidelines on remission, directing states to consider the premature release of prisoners under remission policies, even without a formal application.  

• This judgment, delivered in a suo-motu case initiated in 2021, aims to address prison overcrowding while ensuring a fair and non-discriminatory approach to remission. 

What are Latest SC Guidelines on Remission Policy (2025)? 

• Directive: States must formulate a clear remission policy within 2 months, ensuring alignment with constitutional and judicial principles. 
• Legal Precedent: Remission criteria must be reasonable, as upheld in the Mafabhai Motibhai Sagar Case (2024). 
• Due Process Requirement: Remission cannot be revoked arbitrarily, if conditions are violated, the state must issue a notice with reasons and allow the convict to respond before a final decision. 

Note 

• As per National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB) data for 2022, India's prisons have a 131.4% occupancy rate, with 75.8% undertrials.  
• As per Prison Statistics in India Report (2022), premature releases rose from 2,321 (2020) to 5,035 (2022).  

What is Remission? 

• About:  
  • Remission refers to the reduction of the duration of a prison sentence without altering the nature of the sentence.  
  • It allows a convict to be released earlier than the original term prescribed by the court, provided they meet specific eligibility criteria. 
• Constitutional Provisions: 
  • Article 72 empowers the President of India to grant pardons, reprieves, respites, or remissions of punishment, or to suspend, remit, or commute the sentence of any person convicted of an offense under Union law or in cases involving military courts. 
  • Article 161 grants similar powers to the Governor for offenses under state laws. 
  • Article 32 & 226: Enable the SC and High Courts, respectively, to intervene in remission cases through writ jurisdiction. 
• Statutory Provisions: 
  • Section 473 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023 (earlier Section 432 of the CrPC): Grants state governments the power to remit sentences at any time, with or without conditions.  
    • Non-compliance with conditions can lead to cancellation of remission and re-arrest without a warrant. 
  • Section 475 of BNSS (earlier Section 433A of CrPC): Life convicts sentenced for offenses punishable by death cannot be released before completing 14 years of imprisonment. 

Key Terms 

• Pardon: Completely absolves the convict, removing both conviction and sentence, along with all associated punishments and disqualifications. 
• Commutation: Replaces a punishment with a lesser one, such as converting a death sentence to rigorous imprisonment. 
• Respite: Grants a reduced sentence considering special circumstances, like physical disability or pregnancy of the convict. 
• Reprieve: Temporarily delays the execution of a sentence, particularly the death penalty, allowing time for the convict to seek pardon or commutation. 

What are the Supreme Court Rulings Related to Remission? 

• In Laxman Naskar v. Union of India (2000), the Supreme Court (SC) outlined 5 factors for remission: societal impact, crime severity, risk of recidivism, prison conduct, and potential for reintegration, ensuring a balanced approach to justice and public safety. 
• In Epuru Sudhakar v. State of Andhra Pradesh (2006), the SC ruled that judicial review of remission orders is permissible on grounds such as non-application of mind, mala fide intent, reliance on extraneous or irrelevant considerations, exclusion of relevant materials, or arbitrariness. 
• In the State of Haryana vs. Mahender Singh (2007), the SC held that while remission is not a fundamental right of a convict, the State must exercise its executive power judiciously, considering each case based on relevant factors. 
• In Sangeet & Anr. v. State of Haryana (2013), the SC held that remission under Section 432 CrPC requires a convict’s application and cannot be granted suo-motu by the government. 
• In Mohinder Singh v. State of Punjab (2013), the SC reaffirmed that courts do not have the authority to grant remission on their own, emphasizing that remission must be initiated through a formal request. 
• In Union of India v. V. Sriharan (2015), the SC upheld life imprisonment without remission until the convict's "last breath," deeming it an alternative to the death penalty. 
• The SC, in 2024 quashed the Gujarat government's remission order for the 11 convicts in the Bilkis Bano case and set aside its 2022 judgment that had allowed Gujarat to decide their premature release.  
  • It ruled that, as per Section 432(7) of the CrPC, the "appropriate government" for remission is where the offender is sentenced, not where the crime occurred. This principle was reaffirmed from V. Sriharan v. Union of India (2015) . 
• In Mafabhai Motibhai Sagar v. State of Gujarat (2024), the SC ruled that remission conditions must be reasonable, ensuring they are neither arbitrarily stringent nor vague. 

Read More: 

• What are the Different Types of Pardoning Power? 
• What are the Issues in Granting Remission? 

Drishti Mains Question:

Differentiate between pardon, commutation, remission, reprieve, and respite under Indian law. How do these executive powers contribute to the principles of justice and reform? 

UPSC Civil Services Examination, Previous Year Question (PYQ) 

Mains:

Q. Instances of the President’s delay in commuting death sentences has come under public debate as denial of justice. Should there be a time specified for the President to accept/reject such petitions? Analyse. (2014)