Supreme Court Allows Convict's Petition for Premature Release Under Gujarat Policy. Premature release application must be considered by the state where the crime was committed, not where the trial occurred.

In Favour of Accused
  • 3
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The petition was filed by the convict petitioner seeking a direction for premature release under the policy dated 9th July 1992, applicable at the time of his conviction. The petitioner, along with co-accused, faced trial for serious offences under the Indian Penal Code committed in Gujarat in 2004. The trial was transferred to Maharashtra, where the petitioner was convicted and sentenced to life imprisonment on 21st January 2008. A co-accused had previously sought premature release, which was denied by the Bombay High Court, stating that the appropriate jurisdiction lay with Gujarat. The petitioner subsequently filed for premature release in Gujarat but was denied based on the conclusion of the trial in Maharashtra, referencing Section 432(7) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The Supreme Court analyzed the jurisdictional issues and determined that the appropriate government for considering the application was Gujarat, as the crime occurred there. The court emphasized that the policy in effect at the time of conviction should govern the decision on premature release. Ultimately, the court allowed the petition, set aside the previous judgment, and directed the respondents to consider the application for premature release in accordance with the Gujarat policy within two months, allowing for further legal recourse if necessary.

Headnote

A) Criminal Procedure - Premature Release - Appropriate Government - Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, Section 432(7) - The court held that the appropriate government for considering premature release is the state where the crime was committed, which in this case is Gujarat, despite the trial being conducted in Maharashtra. The court directed that the petitioner's application for premature release be considered under the policy applicable at the time of conviction (Paras 11-16).

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the application for premature release should be considered by the State of Gujarat or Maharashtra.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The Supreme Court allowed the petition, set aside the judgment dated 17th July 2019, and directed the respondents to consider the petitioner's application for premature release under the Gujarat policy within two months.

Law Points

  • Premature release
  • appropriate government
  • trial jurisdiction
  • remission policy
  • Section 432(7) CrPC
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2022 LawText (SC) (05) 205

Writ Petition (Crl.) No. 135 of 2022

2022-05-13

Ajay Rastogi, Vikram Nath

Radheshyam Bhagwandas Shah @ Lala Vakil

State of Gujarat & Anr.

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Petition for premature release under the policy applicable at the time of conviction.

Remedy Sought

The petitioner sought consideration of his application for premature release.

Filing Reason

The petitioner argued that the application should be considered under the Gujarat policy as the crime was committed there.

Previous Decisions

The High Court of Gujarat dismissed the petitioner's application based on the trial being concluded in Maharashtra.

Issues

Whether the application for premature release should be considered by the State of Gujarat or Maharashtra.

Submissions/Arguments

The petitioner contended that the appropriate government for considering premature release is Gujarat, where the crime was committed. The respondents argued that since the trial concluded in Maharashtra, the application should be considered there.

Ratio Decidendi

The appropriate government for considering premature release is the state where the crime was committed, as per Section 432(7) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

Judgment Excerpts

The petition is allowed. The respondents are directed to consider the application of the petitioner for premature release in terms of its policy dated 9th July, 1992.

Procedural History

The petitioner was convicted in Sessions Case No. 634 of 2004, sentenced on 21st January 2008, and subsequently filed for premature release which was dismissed by the High Court of Gujarat.

Acts & Sections

  • Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973: Sections 432, 432(7), 433, 433A
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Quashes Discharge of Bank Clerk in Disciplinary Matter — Finding of Guilt Based on No Evidence Held Perverse. Loan Misappropriation Charge Failed as Complainant Was Not Examined and Loan Was Repaid Before Complaint.
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Alters Conviction in Kerala Scissors Attack Case from Murder to Culpable Homicide Not Amounting to Murder. Single Scissor Blow on Chest of Unarmed Victim Showed Knowledge but Not Intention to Murder Under Section 304 Part II IPC, Reduci...