Premature Release - UP Govt.'s Policy To Release Prisoners Only On Republic Day Arbitrary:Supreme Asks Govt To Consider All Eligible Persons Regardless Of Application

The Supreme Court on May 4 told the state of UP to not deem as ineligible for consideration for premature release those life convicts who have not specifically applied for the relief, and obligated the state government to conduct periodical assessments to identify those who are so entitled.It may be noted that clause 3 (a) of the UP government's policy of August 1, 2018 (framed under Article 161) stipulates that where no application/prayer/representation requesting premature release is preferred, the convict would be deemed covered under the restricted category and such non-application would be one of the basis under the policy to denude their claim for remission."We cannot approve the policy that those who do not specifically apply for remission would fall in the restricted category and would be ineligible for consideration", the bench of Justices Navin Sinha and Krishna Murari has said. The bench was considering a batch of writ applications for premature release of persons sentenced to life imprisonment, after completion of over 14 years of imprisonment. The petitioners have remained incarcerated for actual periods ranging from 16 years to 24 years without remission and 20 years to 31 years with remission. The convictions were primarily under Section 302, 302/149 of the Penal Code.Noting that the avowed object in the policy dated 01.08.2018 is to prevent overcrowding in prisons of the State, to prevent frustration of emotions and disappointment along with rehabilitation and that it assumes much more significance in the present pandemic times to prevent super spreaders, the bench stated that it cannot "approve of the policy" which regards those who do not specifically apply for premature release as ineligible for consideration as such. "As a welfare State, the obligation to do so would lie on the State by periodic assessments", asserted the bench.The bench took judicial notice of the fact that at many times a convict may not be aware of the requirement or may not have the were withal to do so. "The present order therefore imposes an obligation on the State and cannot be read as confined in its operation to the present petitioners alone", the bench has directed.The Court has requested the Executive Chairman of the U.P.State Legal Services Authority, to monitor not only the case of the present petitioners, but of such other prisoners also who may be eligible for consideration but are unable to do so for one reason or the other, keeping in mind the avowed object and purpose of the policy dated 01.08.2018. "The concerned authorities of the State Government are obligated to act in co-operation with the State Legal Services Authority in the larger interest", the bench had directed, clarifying that it may not be understood to have curtailed the procedure or jurisdiction in any manner of the authorities specified in the policy dated 01.08.2018.The bench has also clarified that in the event of any person being aggrieved, the remedy shall first lie before the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution.It may be noted that in April, the Allahabad High Court has also urged the state government to delete from its policy the clause that prohibits the consideration of premature release, if the same is not accompanied by any application / request.The Supreme Court appreciated that the Allahabad High Court had on 16.04.2018, after noticing the lack of fairness and consistency in considering applications for premature release, observed and urged that that Government ought to lay down a transparent policy in regard to premature release of convicts who were lying in prison for a long time, and it was then that State government framed the policy dated 01.08.2018."Curiously, contrary to the direction of the High Court, the State Government, arbitrarily restricted it to premature release of prisoners sentenced to life imprisonment on the event of Republic day each year only. The restricted policy is patently bad for being in derogation of the orders of the High Court", the SC has said.Additionally, the bench found that it is also discriminatory in nature as there is no nexus to be achieved by providing for premature release only on a specified date, when those eligible to be considered for premature release form a class of persons sentenced to life imprisonment. "There is no criteria laid down on basis of which a convict shall be considered for release on the opportune date in contradistinction to another who may be relegated to consideration in normal course. Differentiation amongst this class of convicts on separate indicia based on specified parameters is an entirely different matter", the bench has expressed.The bench noted that the policy having statutory force under Article 161 will naturally apply to all persons sentenced to life imprisonment. The bench has further held that "Having been framed subsequent to the U.P. Jail Manual,1956 and the U.P. Prisoners Release on Probation Rules,1938 will take precedence over...

Premature Release - UP Govt.'s Policy To Release Prisoners Only On Republic Day Arbitrary:Supreme Asks Govt To Consider All Eligible Persons Regardless Of Application

Mehal Jain

Tags