Policy For Premature Release Of Life Convicts Must Be Implemented In Objective & Transparent Manner : Supreme Court

In a recent order, the Supreme Court stressed that the State must implement its policy for premature release of life convicts in an objective and transparent manner. Noting that several convicts languish in jail despite serving long sentences due to inability to access legal resources to apply for remission, the Court stated that the State must consider the cases of eligible prisoners for remission in a diligent manner. 

A bench comprising Justices DY Chandrachud and Hima Kohli made these significant observations while deciding a batch of writ petitions filed by prisoners in Uttar Pradesh seeking remission. The cases related to 512 convicts.

The bench observed :

"The implementation of the policy for premature release has to be carried out in an objective and transparent manner as otherwise it would impinge on the constitutional guarantees under Articles 14 and 21. Many of these life convicts who have suffered long years of incarceration have few or no resources. Lack of literacy, education and social support structures impede their right to access legal remedies. Once the state has formulated its policy defining the terms for premature release, due consideration in terms of the policy must be given to all eligible convicts. The constitutional guarantees against arbitrary treatment and of the right to secure life and personal liberty must not be foreclosed by an unfair process of considering applications for premature release in terms of the policy"

The writ petitions were filed challenging a condition in the State's remission policy that life convicts will not be considered for remission until they attain the age of 60 years. However, the condition was later omitted by the State.

During the course of the proceedings, the Court bestowed its attention to the issue of convicts languishing in prison due to their lack of awareness about the remission policy. In this regard, the Court directed that the authorities must consider the cases of eligible prisoners without waiting for their applications.

Remission of eligible prisoners must be considered diligently

"The prison administration, legal services authorities at the district and state level and officers of the police department and the state must diligently ensure that cases of eligible prisoners are considered on the basis of policy parameters. We have gained a distinct impression, based on the cases which have come before the court here and even earlier that there is a general apathy towards ensuring that the rights which have been made available to convicts who have served out their sentences in terms of the policy are realized. This results in the deprivation of liberty of those who are entitled to be released. They languish in overcrowded jails. Their poverty, illiteracy and disabilities occasioned by long years of incarceration are compounded by the absence of supportive social and legal structures. The promise of equality in our Constitution would not be fulfilled if liberty were to be conditional on an individual's resources, which unfortunately many of these cases provide hard evidence of. This situation must change and hence this court has had to step in. We now proceed to formulate peremptory directions".

Directions passed :

(i)All cases for premature release of convicts undergoing imprisonment for life in the present batch of cases shall be considered in terms of the policy dated 1 August 2018, as amended, subject to the observations which are contained herein. The restriction that a life convict is not eligible for premature release until attaining the age of sixty years, which was introduced by the policy of 28 July 2021, stands deleted by the amendment dated 27 May 2022. Hence, no case for premature release shall be rejected on that ground;