Court Finds Rejection of Remission Applications Based on Outdated Notifications and Unsubstantiated Adverse Opinions Arbitrary and Illegal
In a landmark ruling, the Patna High Court has quashed a decision by the Bihar State Sentence Remission Board, which had rejected the remission applications of prisoners Md Sultan and Tabassum Arra. The Court found the Board's decision arbitrary and illegal, citing reliance on outdated notifications and adverse opinions from authorities that lacked substantive merit.
The case involved the petitioners, who have been incarcerated for over 23 years, seeking remission of their life sentences. The Board had initially rejected their applications based on an outdated 2002 notification and adverse reports from the Superintendent of Police and Trial Court, despite positive recommendations from jail authorities regarding the petitioners' reformation.
Justice Jitendra Kumar, presiding over the case, emphasized that the 2002 notification was no longer valid following the implementation of the Bihar Prison Manual, 2012. The Court highlighted that the offences for which the petitioners were convicted were not listed under categories prohibiting remission as per the 2012 Manual.
The judgment underscored the importance of evaluating remission applications with a focus on reformation potential and societal welfare, rather than solely on the nature of the original crime. The Court criticized the State Sentence Remission Board for failing to consider the petitioners' reformed conduct and the lack of any substantial evidence indicating a likelihood of re-offense.
The ruling also referenced several judicial precedents, reinforcing the notion that remission is a discretionary executive power that must be exercised fairly and in a non-arbitrary manner. The Court ordered the Remission Board to reconsider the applications by May 15, 2026, ensuring compliance with the current legal framework and judicial guidelines.
Bottom Line:
Rejection of remission applications by the State Sentence Remission Board based on outdated notifications and adverse opinions of certain authorities held arbitrary and illegal. The Board must reconsider remission applications in light of the Bihar Prison Manual, 2012, judicial precedents, and reformatory aspects of the criminal justice system.
Statutory provision(s): Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 Section 432, Section 433A; Bihar Prison Manual, 2012 Rule 478, Rule 481
Md Sultan v. State of Bihar, (Patna) : Law Finder Doc id # 2867227
