Sign In
Learn bits
Polity & Governance
Mahesh

11/01/24 07:33 AM IST

The laws around remission policy

In News
  • The Supreme Court set aside the remission of 11 convicts sentenced to life imprisonment for the gang rape of Bilkis Bano and murder of her family, during the 2002 communal riots in Gujarat.
Clemency Powers
  • Article 72 and 161 of the Constitution provide powers to the President and Governor respectively to grant pardon, commutation, remission, respite or reprieve to a convict.
  • These are sovereign powers vested in the heads of the Union and State executive to be exercised on the advice of the council of ministers.
  • Apart from this, the appropriate State government under Section 432 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) may remit the whole or part of the punishment to which a convict has been sentenced. In case of life imprisonment convicts, this remission can be done only after a period of 14 years in jail as per Section 433A of the CrPC.
Order given by Supreme court
  • The Supreme Court in its order categorically held that the Gujarat government is not the appropriate government to consider the remission petition.
  • It held that the May 2022 order of the Supreme Court, that asked the Gujarat government to consider the remission petitions, was obtained through fraud and suppression of facts before the court.
  • Hence, it held the May 2022 order of the Supreme Court to be a nullity. It further ordered the surrender of all the 11 persons before jail authorities within two weeks.
  • It held that the appropriate government for considering the remission petitions in the instant case is Maharashtra and it may consider their petitions in accordance with law and the guidelines laid down by the Court.
  • This order has reinforced the faith in our judicial system and ‘rule of law’ by setting aside a blatantly perverse order that shook the conscience of society at large and women in particular.
  • It is expected that the Maharashtra government would follow the guidelines laid down by the Supreme Court in the Laxman Naskar case under which such crimes that affects the society at large deserve no mercy.
Laxman Naskar versus Union of India
  • Laxman Naskar versus Union of India (2000) had laid down five grounds on which remission is to be considered.
  • The first of these is whether the offence is an individual act of crime that does not affect society.
  • It would be preposterous to surmise that such a heinous crime does not impact the conscience of a civilised society.
  • Thirdly, the Supreme Court in Sangeet versus State of Haryana (2012) had held that a convict serving life imprisonment does not have a right to be prematurely released on completion of 14 years in jail and that remission should be considered only on a case-by-case basis.
  • In light of this judgment, the Union Home Ministry had issued an advisory in February 2013 prescribing that remission should not be granted in a ‘wholesale manner’.
Source- The Hindu

More Related Current Affairs View All

18 Nov

AFSPA in Manipur

'The Manipur government has formally requested the Centre to reconsider and revoke the reimposition of the Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act (AFSPA) in six police station areas of

Read More

18 Nov

BS-III petrol and BS-IV diesel four-wheelers

'With high levels of pollution in Delhi and smog blanketing the city, the Delhi government has introduced measures to improve the air quality.' The Graded Response Action Plan (

Read More

18 Nov

India’s first long-range hypersonic missile

'The Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO)  conducted a successful flight test of long range hypersonic missile from the Dr APJ Abdul Kalam Island off the Odish

Read More

India’s First Ai-Driven Magazine Generator

Generate Your Custom Current Affairs Magazine using our AI in just 3 steps