'143 Premature Release Applications Pending Before Remission Board; Delay Defeats Reformative Objective': Patna High Court

The Patna High Court has expressed concern over the pendency of 143 applications for premature release before the Bihar State Sentence Remission Board, observing that delay in processing such cases defeats the very philosophy of reformation and rehabilitation.

A Division Bench comprising Chief Justice Sangam Kumar Sahoo and Justice Harish Kumar was hearing a criminal appeal where issues relating to consideration of premature release came up.

The Court noted that as per the submission made earlier, the appellant had completed more than 15 years of actual custody, and yet his case for premature release was stated to be considered only after 28.10.2029 on the basis of Rule 481(i) of the Bihar Prison Manual, 2012. On being queried, the State placed details of the appellant's custody, indicating that he had undergone pre-trial detention from 19.10.2009 to 21.05.2017, and post-conviction detention from 22.05.2017 to 15.06.2025, taking his total actual custody to more than 15 years.

The Court noted that under Rule 481 of the 2012 Manual, where a case does not fall within the exceptions under sub-clauses (a), (b) or (c), premature release can be considered upon completion of 14 years of actual imprisonment in terms of Section 433A CrPC. The Advocate General fairly submitted that the appellant's case did not fall within any of the said exceptions.

In view of this, the Court observed that it was unable to comprehend why the appellant's case had not been considered for premature release despite completion of more than 15 years of custody, and why the same was being deferred till 2029. The Court directed the State to file a detailed counter affidavit explaining the position.

The Court further examined the list annexed to the supplementary counter affidavit filed by the State and found that as many as 143 applications for premature release, forwarded by Superintendents of Prisons, were pending before the Bihar State Sentence Remission Board. The Court noted that these applications pertained to multiple years, including one from 2019, five from 2021, three from 2022, six from 2023, sixteen from 2024, seventy-six from 2025, thirteen from 2026, and twenty-three applications for which the year was not specified.

Observing that the Board had already held five sittings in 2025 and three sittings in 2026, the Court questioned why these applications had not been considered despite all requisite documents being available with the Board.

Referring to the decisions of the Supreme Court in Rashidul Jafar v. State of U.P. and Policy Strategy for Grant of Bail, In re, the Court reiterated that premature release is based on the philosophy of reformation and rehabilitation, and that such applications must be processed and disposed of at the earliest, with the power being exercised in a fair and reasonable manner.

The Court also raised concerns regarding the practical application of rules requiring opinions from the presiding judge of the trial court, observing that due to passage of time, the original judge may not be available, and it was unclear how another presiding judge could meaningfully give such opinion.

Accordingly, the Court directed the Home Secretary, Government of Bihar to file an affidavit detailing the decisions taken by the Board in its upcoming sitting scheduled on 11.05.2026 in respect of the 143 pending applications. The matter has been directed to be listed on 13.05.2026.

Case Title: Jagarnath Thakur v. State of Bihar.

Case No.: Criminal Appeal (DB) No. 620 of 2024.

Appearance: Mr. Rohit Kumar, Mr. Manish Kumar and Mrs. Nitu Kumari appeared for the Appellant. Advocate General Mr. P.K. Shahi, assisted by Mr. Vikas Kumar and Mr. Ajay Mishra, appeared for the State.

Click Here To Read/Download Order