Today, On 13th July, The Supreme Court questioned whether Section 479 of the BNSS, concerning the release of first-time offenders, could be applied retrospectively. The inquiry arose during a suo motu hearing on the issue of overcrowding and inhumane conditions in Indian prisons and jails.
New Delhi: The Supreme Court, On Tuesday, instructed the Central government to clarify whether a provision in the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) allowing courts to grant bail to first-time undertrials could be applied retrospectively.
This provision, outlined in Section 479 of the BNSS, permits the release of undertrials who have already served one-third of the maximum sentence for the crime they are accused of, provided they have not been previously convicted of any offense.
Section 479 is designed to address the plight of undertrials who have been in jail for extended periods with no foreseeable conclusion to their trial. However, this provision does not apply to individuals accused of crimes that carry the death penalty or life imprisonment.
In contrast to the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), which allows for the release of undertrials only after they have served half of the maximum sentence for their alleged offense, the BNSS introduces a more lenient option for first-time offenders.
This new law enables the release of such undertrials after they have served one-third of the maximum possible sentence.
The Supreme Court‘s directive for clarification highlights the need to determine whether this more lenient provision can be applied to cases retroactively, offering potential relief to those who have been detained under the older legal framework.
A bench comprising Justices Hima Kohli and Sandeep Mehta acknowledged the submission by amicus curiae, Senior Advocate Gaurav Agrawal, who pointed out that applying the provision as intended could significantly alleviate prison overcrowding.
The Court ordered,
“We direct the Union to file an affidavit from the relevant department addressing this provision, its potential retrospective application, and its impact on undertrials nationwide.”
The Court hearing a suo motu case concerning overcrowded and inhumane conditions in Indian prisons and jail complexes.
Previously, the Court expressed strong disapproval of the lack of urgency displayed by State governments and Union Territories in implementing directives aimed at reducing jail overcrowding. The Court emphasized the need for all stakeholders to act promptly, given that the issue directly pertains to the right to liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution.
During the hearing, amicus curiae also presented a note addressing related concerns in prisons across Karnataka, Madhya Pradesh, and other states. The Court instructed these states to review the note, resolve the highlighted issues, and submit a compliance affidavit by October 13.
However, concerning the BNSS provision and its applicability, the Court set a shorter timeline, scheduling the matter for consideration on August 22.