Case Note & Summary
The judgment concerns five criminal writ petitions filed by convicts seeking premature release under the remission policy of the State of Maharashtra. The petitioners were convicted for offences under the Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act, 1999 (MCOCA) and other special statutes, and were serving sentences in various prisons. They had completed the requisite period of sentence and had good conduct, but the respondents (the Deputy Inspector General of Prisons and the Superintendent of Prisons) denied them premature release solely on the ground that they were convicted under MCOCA, which the respondents claimed was not covered by the general remission policy. The petitioners argued that the Government Resolution dated 27-02-2009, which provides for premature release of convicts who have completed a specified period of sentence and have good conduct, does not exclude any category of convicts. They contended that the respondents' action was arbitrary and violative of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution. The respondents, on the other hand, argued that MCOCA convicts are not entitled to remission under the said resolution because the Act itself provides for a separate remission mechanism. The court, after hearing the parties and the amicus curiae, held that the Government Resolution dated 27-02-2009 does not make any distinction based on the nature of the offence. The court observed that the respondents cannot create an artificial distinction that is not present in the resolution. The court further held that the denial of premature release to the petitioners solely on the ground of their conviction under MCOCA is arbitrary and violative of Articles 14 and 21. The court allowed all the petitions and directed the respondents to consider the cases of the petitioners for premature release in accordance with the Government Resolution dated 27-02-2009 and the Maharashtra Prison Rules, without discriminating on the basis of the offence for which they were convicted.
Headnote
A) Prisons - Remission of Sentence - Premature Release - Uniform Application - The court considered whether convicts under special statutes like MCOCA can be denied premature release under the general remission policy. Held that the Government Resolution dated 27-02-2009 does not exclude any category of convicts, and the respondents cannot create an artificial distinction based on the nature of the offence. The denial of remission solely on the ground of conviction under MCOCA is arbitrary and violative of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution. (Paras 1-10) B) Prisons - Remission of Sentence - Government Resolution - Interpretation - The Government Resolution dated 27-02-2009 provides for premature release of convicts who have completed a specified period of sentence and have good conduct. The resolution does not carve out any exception for convicts under special statutes. The court held that the respondents cannot read into the resolution a condition that is not there. (Paras 5-8) C) Prisons - Remission of Sentence - MCOCA Convicts - Entitlement - The petitioners, convicted under MCOCA, had completed the requisite sentence and had good conduct. The court held that they are entitled to be considered for premature release under the same terms as other convicts. The respondents' action of denying them consideration is illegal and unsustainable. (Paras 9-10)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the respondents could deny premature release to convicts solely on the ground that they were convicted for offences under the Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act, 1999 (MCOCA) or similar special statutes, despite the petitioners satisfying all other conditions for remission under the Maharashtra Prison Rules and the Government Resolution dated 27-02-2009.
Final Decision
All the criminal writ petitions are allowed. The respondents are directed to consider the cases of the petitioners for premature release in accordance with the Government Resolution dated 27-02-2009 and the Maharashtra Prison Rules, without discriminating on the basis of the offence for which they were convicted.
Law Points
- Remission of sentence
- Premature release
- Prison Rules
- Article 14
- Article 21
- Uniform application of remission policy
- Distinction based on offence not permissible
