Calcutta High Court Orders Premature Release Of Life Convicts In Absence Of Presiding Judge's Opinion U/S 432 CrPC

The Calcutta High Court on Wednesday directed the State Government to release two life convicts who were languishing in jail for 18 years, on premature release, after the same was denied by the government on the ground that it did not receive the opinion of the Presiding Judge of the court before or by which the conviction was held.

The single judge bench of Justice Bibek Chaudhuri observed that under Section 432(2) CrPC, opinion of Presiding Judge of the court before or by which the conviction was held or confirmed is necessary. Since the same was absent in this case, the High Court perused the judgment itself and said,

“On perusal of the judgment passed by this Court in appeal it is found that the entire case was based on circumstantial evidence. The petitioners are presently aged about 73 years and 84 years respectively. There is no reason in favour of petitioners’ prayer for refusal of premature release. At the fag end of life they will get mental peace if they are allowed to lead last few years of their life with their family members.”

The confirming judgment was passed by the Calcutta High Court.

The petitioners-life convicts approached the High Court under Section 482 of CrPC read with Article 227 of the Constitution of India for their premature release under Sections 432 and 433 CrPC.

It was contended by the petitioners that they were in custody since 2005, at present the petitioner No.1 is aged about 74 years and the petitioner No.2 is aged about 84 years and they do not have any criminal antecedents excepting the present case.

It was further submitted that while in custody, the petitioner no.2 carried on his academic activities from the correctional home and obtained Master Degree in English from the Calcutta University and he was also entrusted to teach other convicts in the correctional home.

It was highlighted that the petitioner’s prayer for premature release was favourably considered by the State Sentence Review Board (SSRB), but they could not be released by the appropriate government as the government did not receive the opinion of the Presiding Judge of the court before or by which the conviction was had or confirmed.

The Court noted:

“A judicial scrutiny is contemplated in the provisions contained in Section 432(2) of the Code and sufficient reasons are required to be provided so that the appropriate government may not take any arbitrary decision with regard to suspension or remission of sentence.”

The Court relied upon the judgment of the Co-ordinate bench of the Calcutta High Court in WPA 17248 of 2021 wherein the court dismissed the opinion of SSRB which refused a prayer for remission of sentence and premature release of a person who was suffering sentence for about 17 years.

The co-ordinate bench in the said case held:

“there are overwhelming materials on record unerringly indicating towards remission of the petitioner, there is no justifiable cause to violate the petitioner’s right of equality as enshrined in Article 14 of the Constitution of India in discriminating against the petitioner to refuse such remission.”

The court noted that in the instant case the opinion of the Presiding Judge was not available with the SSRB and sentence of the petitioners was confirmed by the High Court.

The court further noted that the entire case against the petitioners was based on circumstantial evidence and there was no reason for refusal of premature release of the petitioners.

Thus the court directed the Principal Secretary, Home Affairs to convene a meeting of SSRB within a fortnight and pass formal order of release of the petitioners.

Case Title: Anirudha Halder & Anr. v. The State of West Bengal

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Cal) 86

Coram: Justice Bibek Chaudhuri

Click Here to Read/Download Judgment