Court Upholds Life Imprisonment as Sentence for Natural Life, Denies Release After 20 Years
In a significant judgment, the Karnataka High Court has dismissed a writ petition filed by Sri Kishan, who sought an immediate release from prison, claiming completion of 20 years of actual imprisonment under a life sentence. The court ruled that life imprisonment, in the absence of a specific judicial directive, equates to incarceration for the remainder of the convict's natural life, subject to remission or commutation by the appropriate government.
The judgment delivered by Justice Suraj Govindaraj examined the claims of the petitioner, who was convicted under Sections 302 and 364A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and originally sentenced to death, which was later commuted to life imprisonment by the Karnataka High Court in 2013. The petitioner argued that his sentence should be considered as served after 20 years, based on the interpretation of Section 57 of the IPC and a precedent set by the Supreme Court in the case of Sukhdev Yadav.
The court clarified that Section 57 of the IPC, which equates life imprisonment to 20 years solely for the calculation of fractional terms of punishment, does not mandate release after 20 years. It emphasized that the sentencing direction in the petitioner’s case did not fix the term of life imprisonment at 20 years but merely set a minimum threshold for considering remission.
Justice Govindaraj cited several Supreme Court judgments, including Gopal Vinayak Godse and Mohinder Singh, to reaffirm that life imprisonment means imprisonment for the entire natural life of the convict unless altered by executive action. The court also addressed the scope of its jurisdiction under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution, stating that it could not issue a writ of mandamus for the release of the petitioner, as the power to remit or commute sentences lies with the appropriate government.
While dismissing the petition, the court noted that the petitioner is now eligible to apply for remission, having completed 20 years of imprisonment, and directed the appropriate government to consider any application made by the petitioner on its merits.
This judgment underscores the principle that life imprisonment is not equivalent to a fixed term unless specifically directed by the judiciary, and highlights the executive's role in deciding premature release through remission policies.
Bottom Line:
Life imprisonment means imprisonment for the remainder of the convict's natural life unless specifically restricted by judicial direction or commuted/remitted by the appropriate Government.
Statutory provision(s): Indian Penal Code, 1860 Section 57, Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 Sections 432, 433A, Indian Penal Code, 1860 Section 302, Constitution of India, 1950 Articles 226, 227
Sri Kishan v. State Of Karnataka, (Karnataka) : Law Finder Doc id # 2869105
