The Supreme Court expressed concern over the suppression of facts in a remission plea, emphasizing the importance of transparency in legal proceedings. The court stated that any attempt to withhold critical information undermines the justice system and erodes trust. It highlighted the need for thorough scrutiny in cases involving remission to ensure fairness and accountability.
The Supreme Court expressed strong disapproval regarding the suppression of facts by one of the women petitioners seeking remission and has requested her to clarify her actions.
A bench of Justices Abhay S. Oka and A.G. Masih noted that the petitioner failed to inform the court about an order from the Delhi High Court concerning her plea. One of the convicts had concealed the fact that she had approached the Delhi High Court for similar relief, which she did not disclose to the Supreme Court.
Additional Solicitor General Rajkumar Bhaskar Thakare presented two orders from the Delhi High Court regarding the petitioner’s plea. He informed the Supreme Court that, in its first order dated October 16, 2024, the Delhi High Court granted the petitioner two weeks to surrender and allowed her to apply for parole.
Unaware of this order, the Supreme Court extended the time for the petitioner to surrender based on its order dated October 21, which subsequently allowed her to extend the surrender period with the Delhi High Court’s approval.
The Supreme Court remarked,
“The order dated October 16, 2024, passed by the Delhi High Court was not brought to our notice when we issued notice on October 21, 2024, and granted extension of time to the petitioner to surrender. If the order dated October 16, 2024, had been mentioned, our order would not have been issued.”
The Court further noted that the Delhi High Court extended the time for surrender until November 8, 2024. Despite this, the petitioner did not inform the Supreme Court about the writ petition filed in the Delhi High Court or the orders passed.
The Supreme Court observed,
“It appears prima facie that stringent action will need to be taken against the petitioner for suppression of facts, including potential action under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971. We, therefore, issue notice to the petitioner to explain her conduct.”
Read Also: Supreme Court Questions Gujarat on Delays in Prisoners’ Remission Applications
The notice is set for return on December 16, 2024. Additionally, the Court directed the Delhi State Legal Services Authority to appoint an advocate to represent the petitioner, who will be allowed to meet her in prison to explain her situation.
The appointed advocate must file an affidavit detailing the petitioner’s conduct and indicate whose advice led her to file two proceedings.
The Supreme Court also stated that if the petitioner does not surrender by November 30, 2024, the State Police should take her into custody immediately.