Being On Bail Does Not Disqualify Convict From Seeking Premature Release: Patna High Court

The Patna High Court has held that a convict's application for premature release can be considered even if the convict is on bail, as eligibility depends on the total sentence served and not only on the period of physical incarceration.

A Division Bench of Chief Justice Sangam Kumar Sahoo and Justice Harish Kumar was hearing a criminal appeal where the Court was examining the refusal to consider the appellant's premature release application.

The Court had earlier noted that the Bihar State Sentence Remission Board had deferred consideration of the appellant's premature release till 28.10.2029 on the ground that he had not completed 20 years with remission, although he had already undergone actual custody of 15 years, 7 months and 28 days as on 17.06.2025.

After considering the affidavit filed by the A.I.G. (R), Prisons and Correctional Services, Bihar, the Court held that the explanation for refusing to consider the appellant's case despite completion of over 15 years of actual custody was “entirely unacceptable.” It further observed that reliance on a 1984 letter was unjustified after enactment of the Bihar Prison Manual, 2012.

The Court noted that Rule 481 of the 2012 Manual mandates that every life convict covered by Section 433A CrPC, now Section 475 BNSS, is eligible to be considered for premature release immediately after serving 14 years of actual imprisonment without remissions, unless the case falls within specified exceptions.

The Court observed:

“Premature release application can be considered even if the convict is on bail as the eligibility depends on the total sentence served, not on the amount of physical incarceration. Time spent on bail can be a factor for consideration of overall sentence. In other words, being on bail does not disqualify a convict from having his premature release application considered by the Government.”

Since the Advocate General had submitted that the appellant's case did not fall within the exceptions under Rule 481, the Court held that rejection of the premature release application and the decision to consider it only after 28.10.2029 could not be sustained. Accordingly, the Court directed the Remission Board to consider the appellant's case afresh in accordance with law.

The Court also noted that 143 premature release applications sponsored by prison superintendents were pending before the Bihar State Sentence Remission Board. It found that 19 prisoners had not been considered because they had allegedly not completed 20 years of incarceration under the 2012 Manual.

In light of its findings, the Court directed that the cases of those 19 prisoners must also be considered afresh if they have completed 14 years of actual imprisonment without remission and do not fall within the exceptions under Rule 481.

The matter will next be listed on 22.06.2026, when the I.G. Prisons, Bihar has been directed to appear virtually and file an affidavit detailing the status of the appellant's premature release application after fresh consideration.

Case Title: Jagarnath Thakur v. State of Bihar.

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

Appearance: Mr. Manish Kumar for the Appellant. Mr. Ajay Mishra for the Respondent.

 Click Here To Read/Download Order