Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Ramu Rangrut Madkam, a life convict prisoner (Prisoner No. C-7222) lodged in Central Prison, Nagpur, filed a Criminal Writ Petition before the Bombay High Court (Nagpur Bench) seeking the benefit of remission in his sentence under Government Resolution dated 03.06.2017. He was convicted by the Additional Sessions Judge, Chandrapur in Sessions Case No.22 of 2004 on 27.02.2007 for offences punishable under Sections 396 (dacoity with murder) and 397 (robbery with attempt to cause death or grievous hurt) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC). For the offence under Section 396 IPC, he was sentenced to imprisonment for life. The Government Resolution dated 03.06.2017 granted a one-time remission benefit to various categories of prisoners who were undergoing sentences of imprisonment as of 14.06.2016. The remission periods were tabulated and were to be applied after the prisoner actually underwent a term of 14 years of imprisonment. The resolution also contained guidelines regarding ineligible prisoners and required that the decision on remission be taken after obtaining an appropriate opinion from the concerned Court (the convicting Court). The petitioner claimed that he had already served more than 14 years of imprisonment and was entitled to remission. The respondents (Deputy Inspector General of Prisons, East Zone, Nagpur and Superintendent of Prison, Central Prison, Nagpur) opposed the petition. The Court heard learned counsel Shri Tarun Parmar for the petitioner and learned APP Miss H. N. Jaipurkar for the respondents. The Court observed that the Government Resolution required the concerned Sessions Court to apply its mind and give an opinion on whether the prisoner is eligible for remission. The Court directed the respondents to seek an opinion from the Additional Sessions Judge, Chandrapur (the convicting court) and thereafter decide the petitioner's claim for remission in accordance with law. The petition was disposed of with these directions.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Remission of Sentence - Government Resolution dated 03.06.2017 - One-time remission benefit - The petitioner, convicted under Sections 396 and 397 IPC and sentenced to life imprisonment, claimed remission under the Government Resolution dated 03.06.2017, which grants one-time remission to prisoners who have undergone 14 years of imprisonment as of 14.06.2016. The Court held that the petitioner is entitled to consideration for remission, but the decision must be taken after obtaining an opinion from the concerned Sessions Court as per the guidelines in the resolution. (Paras 4-6) B) Criminal Law - Remission of Sentence - Requirement of Sessions Court Opinion - The Government Resolution dated 03.06.2017 mandates that the decision regarding remission be taken after obtaining appropriate opinion from the concerned Court (the convicting Court). The Court directed the respondents to seek such opinion from the Additional Sessions Judge, Chandrapur, and thereafter decide the petitioner's claim for remission in accordance with law. (Paras 5-6)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the petitioner, convicted under Sections 396 and 397 IPC and sentenced to life imprisonment, is entitled to the one-time remission benefit under Government Resolution dated 03.06.2017, and whether the requirement of obtaining an opinion from the concerned Sessions Court is mandatory.
Final Decision
The petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents to seek an opinion from the Additional Sessions Judge, Chandrapur (the convicting court) regarding the petitioner's eligibility for remission under Government Resolution dated 03.06.2017, and thereafter decide the petitioner's claim for remission in accordance with law.
Law Points
- Remission of sentence
- Government Resolution dated 03.06.2017
- One-time remission benefit
- Life imprisonment
- Sections 396 and 397 IPC
- Requirement of Sessions Court opinion
