Introduction 

• This is a landmark judgment relating to the applicability of Section 433A of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 and the power of remission. 
• This judgment was delivered by a 3-judge bench comprising of Justice AM Ahmadi, Justice PB Sawant and Justice SC Agarwal.     

Facts

• The petitioner in this case was tried and convicted for murder on 20th December 1978 in the Sessions Court and was ordered to suffer life imprisonment. 
• His appeal was dismissed by the High Court of Rajasthan. 
• He filed a writ petition in the Rajasthan High Court for pre-mature release on the plea that he is entitled to be released in accordance with the Rajasthan Prisons (Shortening of Sentences) Rules, 1958 (1958 Rules) notwithstanding the insertion of Section 433A in the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) just two days before his conviction. 
•  His grievance is that he was denied release under the 1958 Rules under the garb of newly added Section 433A of CrPC. 
• The case of the petitioners in nutshell is that there is a differentiation between the 1958 Rules and the newly added Section 433A of CrPC: 
  • 1958 Rules provide that a ‘lifer’ who has served an actual sentence of about 9 years and 3 months is entitled to be considered for release if the total sentence served including the remissions is 14 years. 
  • Section 433A however provides that a ‘lifer’ cannot be considered for release unless he has completed actual incarceration of 14 years.   

Issue Involved  

• Whether the convict is entitled to be released keeping in view Article 433A of CrPC? 

Observations 

• The following observations were made by the Court in this case: 
  • It is, therefore, clear from the aforesaid observations that unless the sentence for life imprisonment is commuted or remitted as stated earlier by the appropriate authority under the provisions of the relevant law, a convict is bound in law to serve the entire life term in prison; 
  • the rules framed under the Prisons Act or like statute may enable such a convict to earn remissions but such remissions will not entitle him to release before he has completed 14 years of incarceration in view of section 433A of the Code unless of course power has been exercised under Article 72/161 of the Constitution. 
• The Court further also observed that the constitutional power under Article 72 and Article 161 of the Constitution of India, 1950 (COI) overrides the statutory power contained in Section 432 and Section 433A of CrPC as well as powers conferred by Section 54 and Section 55 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC). 
• The above power has to be, no doubt, exercised by the President or Governor on the advice of his Council of Ministers. 
• The Court further observed that till the proper rules are framed the remission rules framed under the Prisons Act or under any other similar legislation by the State Governments may provide effective guidelines of a recommendatory nature which would be helpful to the Government to release the prisoner. 
• The Court noted that the petitioner has not completed 14 years of actual imprisonment and hence he cannot make use of specific legal provisions for early release. 
•  Thus, the Court in this case dismissed the petition. 

Conclusion 

• The Court in this case discussed the important concept of remission that can be found in several legislations. 
• The Court concluded that unless the person has actually undergone an imprisonment of 14 years there will be no release.