Decide Remission Applications Without Delay : Supreme Court To Chhattisgarh Govt

In a recent ruling by the Supreme Court of India, a case involving the belated grant of permanent remission, the Court urged the Chhattisgarh State Government to ensure that such cases are considered without unnecessary delays, following the government's policy. The Court noted that the petitioner was released and the Secretary had tendered his apology for belated remission.

It observed “Though belatedly, the prayer for grant of permanent remission has been accepted and the affidavit filed by the Principal Secretary of the first respondent records that the petitioner has been released on permanent remission on 26th September, 2023. An apology has been tendered by the Secretary. The fact remains that though the petitioner was entitled to permanent remission much earlier, the decision-making process was delayed. We hope and trust that the State Government will ensure that there is no delay in considering the cases for grant of permanent remission in terms of its policy.”

In the previous hearing, the court had expressed concern over the conduct of the Jail Superintendent for producing a purported letter from a prisoner, which indicated the prisoner's desire to withdraw a petition filed. The State had also faced criticism from the Supreme Court for not complying with its earlier directive issued on August 21.

The bench comprising Justices Abhay S Oka and Justice Pankaj Mithal was hearing a writ petition under Art. 32 for directing the respondent to re-consider the petitioner's case for premature release by seeking the opinion afresh of the Sentencing Court.

In the present case, the petitioner is a 42-year-old convict who's undergoing life imprisonment for more than 15 years without remission on the charge of murder committed in 1999. The trial awarded the sentence of life imprisonment which was also upheld by the High Court. The SLP before the Supreme Court against the conviction and sentence was also dismissed in 2015.

The Court emphasized that, regardless of the letter's origin, it was the Jail Superintendent's responsibility to make the petitioner aware of the consequences of unconditionally withdrawing the Writ Petition. Moreover, the Court highlighted that legal aid lawyers regularly visit prisons and suggested that the petitioner should have been referred to a legal aid lawyer for proper advice

The Court ordered that going forward, the Jail Authorities in the State should ensure that such precautions are taken and that prisoners are properly informed of the implications of their actions.

It underlined, “Before taking such a letter from the petitioner, he ought to have been referred to a legal aid lawyer who could have advised him properly. This precaution shall be hereinafter taken by the Jail Authorities in the State."

Also Read - Supreme Court Questions Gujarat Govt On Time Taken To Decide Remission Applications, Seeks Details Of Pending Petitions For Premature Release

Case title: Chain Singh v. State of Chattisgarh

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 895

For petitioner: Advocate on Record Mr. Mohd. Irshad Hanif

Click Here To Read/Download Order