The Supreme Court has directed the State of Gujarat to clarify the time taken to adjudicate applications from prisoners seeking remission. Additionally, the apex court has asked the state to provide details on the number of petitions currently pending in the High Court and Supreme Court, which are seeking premature release.
This directive emerged from a bench comprising Justices Abhay S Oka and Pankaj Mithal during the hearing of a writ petition initiated by a prisoner who was seeking the evaluation of his remission application. The court had previously reprimanded the State for its failure to decide on the remission application, even in the face of a judicial order.
Following the Supreme Court’s admonition, the State of Gujarat, on September 15, 2023, granted permanent remission to the petitioner. However, this remission was subject to four specific conditions. Addressing these conditions, the court expressed a prima facie view, stating,
“Prima facie, we find that condition Nos.1 to 3 could not have been imposed after coming to the conclusion that this was a fit case to exercise power of the State Government under Section 432 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. Apart from the question of the authority of the State to impose such conditions, another important question is whether the grant of remission can be conditional which is open to revocation, as provided in the second condition.”
The Supreme Court has now asked the State to elucidate,
“whether such conditions can be lawfully imposed and whether the policy of the State Government provides for incorporating such conditions.”
Furthermore, the court has directed the State to detail in an affidavit
“the normal time span taken by it to consider the cases for the grant of permanent remission.”
The court also seeks information on
“whether a specific time line has been prescribed for taking decisions on the prayer for grant of permanent remission.”
Moreover, the State is expected to
“point out how many Writ Petitions are pending in the constitutional Courts making grievances about the non-consideration of the prayer for grant of remission.”
The matter is set for further deliberation on November 24, 2023.
Representing the petitioner were Advocate-on-Record Rauf Rahim and Advocate Ali Asghar Rahim, while AoR Swati Ghildiyal appeared for the State.
Case Title: Mafabhai Motibhai Sagar v. State of Gujarat
