PATNA: The Patna prime court on Thursday ruled that the character of crime, committed through any convict serving life imprisonment, can’t be used a parameter for now not granting him some great benefits of remission.
The division bench of Justice Ravi Ranjan and Justice Madhuresh Kumar used to be hearing a legal writ petition filed through a convict Hardeo Rai whose remission used to be denied through the Bihar State Sentence Remission Board, Patna, in keeping with mere reason why that he used to be interested by a heinous natured crime.
The prime court rapped the board and simultaneously quashed and set aside its order by which it did not thought to be Rai for remission.
The court ordered that Rai’s subject be sent prior to board once more for consideration right through next remission assembly. Counsel Umesh Prasad represented Rai while Prabhu Narayan Sharma represented state executive in the subject.
Rai used to be accused in a homicide case which took place at Soniya under Daudpur police station space of Saran district on January five, 1996.
Rai used to be convicted for rigorous imprisonment for life through Saran’s further sessions judge (ADJ-XI) under Section 302 (homicide) and 201 (inflicting disappearance of proof of crime) on February 22, 2003.
The convict is lodged behind bars for more than 20 years after which his subject used to be introduced prior to the remission board for consideration. On June three this 12 months, board passed orders that Rai used to be now not thought to be for unencumber under short sentencing policy of the state executive.
The prime court rapped board as well as presiding officer (from whose court sentence used to be delivered) for taking into account nature of crime, committed through Rai as a parameter that he may just now not be launched.
“While jail superintendent thought to be convict’s conduct adequate right through tenure of conviction, superintendent of police (SP) additionally gave record that his unencumber would now not be problem for peace and tranquillity of society together with prisons division’s probation officer. However, presiding officer, with out taking into account these studies, best thought to be nature of crime on which remission board totally banked while taking choice not to unencumber Rai,” the bench ruled while turning in its judgement.
The bench additional ruled that it seems that that the board lost sight of the SP’s opinion and different record through merely approved presiding officer’s record.
In 2002, Supreme Court had ruled that one has stay within jail for complete life if sentenced for life imprisonment. However other state executive made other regulations for remission of life sentences.
Bihar has regulations of taking into account remission on completion 20 years imprisonment through a convict.
The division bench of Justice Ravi Ranjan and Justice Madhuresh Kumar used to be hearing a legal writ petition filed through a convict Hardeo Rai whose remission used to be denied through the Bihar State Sentence Remission Board, Patna, in keeping with mere reason why that he used to be interested by a heinous natured crime.
The prime court rapped the board and simultaneously quashed and set aside its order by which it did not thought to be Rai for remission.
The court ordered that Rai’s subject be sent prior to board once more for consideration right through next remission assembly. Counsel Umesh Prasad represented Rai while Prabhu Narayan Sharma represented state executive in the subject.
Rai used to be accused in a homicide case which took place at Soniya under Daudpur police station space of Saran district on January five, 1996.
Rai used to be convicted for rigorous imprisonment for life through Saran’s further sessions judge (ADJ-XI) under Section 302 (homicide) and 201 (inflicting disappearance of proof of crime) on February 22, 2003.
The convict is lodged behind bars for more than 20 years after which his subject used to be introduced prior to the remission board for consideration. On June three this 12 months, board passed orders that Rai used to be now not thought to be for unencumber under short sentencing policy of the state executive.
The prime court rapped board as well as presiding officer (from whose court sentence used to be delivered) for taking into account nature of crime, committed through Rai as a parameter that he may just now not be launched.
“While jail superintendent thought to be convict’s conduct adequate right through tenure of conviction, superintendent of police (SP) additionally gave record that his unencumber would now not be problem for peace and tranquillity of society together with prisons division’s probation officer. However, presiding officer, with out taking into account these studies, best thought to be nature of crime on which remission board totally banked while taking choice not to unencumber Rai,” the bench ruled while turning in its judgement.
The bench additional ruled that it seems that that the board lost sight of the SP’s opinion and different record through merely approved presiding officer’s record.
In 2002, Supreme Court had ruled that one has stay within jail for complete life if sentenced for life imprisonment. However other state executive made other regulations for remission of life sentences.
Bihar has regulations of taking into account remission on completion 20 years imprisonment through a convict.
Nature of crime can’t be parameter to bar a convict from remission: Patna HC
![Nature of crime can’t be parameter to bar a convict from remission: Patna HC]()
Reviewed by Kailash
on
September 06, 2018
Rating:
