Supreme Court Asks States To Consider Using Software For Automatic Consideration Of Prisoners' Premature Release

The Supreme Court has directed the implementation of a digital processing module to automate the consideration of premature release applications of prisoners in Uttar Pradesh, after uncovering widespread delays in the State's remission system and irregular releases of convicts pursuant to a judicial direction that was subsequently declared bad in law.The Court also asked all States and UTs to develop a software along similar lines in collaboration with the NIC or otherwise, for the automatic consideration of prisoners' applications for premature release in accordance with their respective policies/schemes.A Bench of Justice J.K. Maheshwari and Justice Atul S. Chandurkar issued the directions while hearing an appeal filed by Surendra alias Sunda, who had challenged the Allahabad High Court's judgment affirming his conviction for murder under Sections 302, 148 and 149 of the Indian Penal Code and sentence of life imprisonment.Although the appeal concerned the appellant's conviction, the proceedings eventually led the Court to examine the larger issue of delays in processing applications for remission and premature release in Uttar Pradesh prisons.Convict Released After Serving Only 2 Years Due To Misapplication Of High Court OrderThe issue came to light when the Court was informed that the appellant had been released on bail in March 2024 pursuant to an order passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mathura. The release was based on a January 2024 order of the Allahabad High Court in Ganesh v. State of U.P., which directed that convicts whose premature release applications remained pending for more than six months be released on bail.The Supreme Court noted that the appellant's case had no connection with the Ganesh matter and that he had undergone only two years and five months of imprisonment when he was released. Finding the circumstances troubling, the Court sought an explanation as to how a Chief Judicial Magistrate could release a life convict without any specific order passed in his case.Subsequently, a Full Bench of the Allahabad High Court in Ambrish Kumar Verma v. State of Uttar Pradesh held that remission powers vest exclusively with the competent executive authorities and that courts could not issue general directions authorising Chief Judicial Magistrates to release convicts merely because their remission applications were pending.158 Convicts Released Under Invalid DirectionAffidavits filed before the Supreme Court revealed that, acting upon the directions in Ganesh, District Legal Services Authorities had forwarded lists of prisoners whose remission applications were pending for over six months to Chief Judicial Magistrates, who thereafter ordered their release.As a result, 158 convicts were released across Uttar Pradesh. Significantly, 21 of them, including the present appellant, had not completed 14 years of imprisonment, which is ordinarily the minimum period required before a life convict can be considered for premature release under the State's policies.The Court was informed that arrest warrants were subsequently issued against several such prisoners after the Full Bench judgment. By November 2024, 25 convicts had been re-arrested while warrants remained pending against others.Court Finds Huge Backlog Of Eligible PrisonersThe Court's inquiry revealed an alarming backlog in the processing of remission cases.An affidavit filed by the State disclosed that as on October 31, 2024, there were 1,678 life convicts who had completed more than 14 years of imprisonment without remission and whose cases were at various stages of consideration.Of these, 915 cases had not even been forwarded to the competent authority for decision, 431 cases were pending before District Magistrates, 62 proposals were awaiting scrutiny at the prison headquarters level and 97 proposals had been returned to jails for corrections or due to non-availability of judgments. Only 93 prisoners had actually been released.The Court described the situation as reflecting serious administrative inefficiencies and observed that the reasons furnished for the delays were largely unsatisfactory.The Bench referred to its recent judgment in In Re: Policy Strategy for Grant of Bail, delivered in February 2025, which approved a Standard Operating Procedure prepared by the National Legal Services Authority (NALSA) concerning parole, furlough and premature release of prisoners.In that judgment, the Court held that where a remission policy exists, the State has an obligation to consider the cases of eligible convicts automatically as soon as they become entitled for consideration. The Court clarified that eligible prisoners should not be required to file separate applications seeking remission and that prison authorities must initiate the process on their own.The Court had also directed District Legal Services Authorities to monitor the process and maintain data regarding prisoners becoming eligible for premature release.Pushes For...

Supreme Court Asks States To Consider Using Software For Automatic Consideration Of Prisoners' Premature Release

LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK

Supreme Court Asks States To Consider Using Software For Automatic Consideration Of Prisoners' Premature Release

LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK

This is a premium content Available exclusively to Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers