The Supreme Court on Tuesday issued a slew of directions to ensure that convicts are aware of their options when it comes to applying for permanent remission (premature release from prison) or challenging the rejection of such applications [In Re: Policy Strategy for Grant of Bail].
Among other directions, a Bench of Justices Abhay S Oka and Augustine George Masih made it clear that if a remission application is rejected, the reasons for such rejection must be communicated to the convict.
"All States must ensure that orders of rejection are communicated to concerned convicts ... We make it clear that State must ensure that rejection orders are communicated within one week from date of decision. If rejection orders do not contain reasons, reasons recorded by the review board must be communicated to convicts," the Court said in its order.
The Court added that rejection orders must be forwarded to the concerned legal services authority, which can thereafter ensure that convicts are told about their remedy to challenge the said rejection.
The Court clarified that remission earlier granted to convicts cannot be automatically cancelled. It further warned the States/Union Territories (UTs) to ensure that they do not impose stereotypical conditions while granting remission to convicts.
"State must not impose stereotypical conditions while granting remission to convicts. Each condition must be in line with the facts of that particular case," the Court said.
Notably, Court also directed that copies of the remission policy applicable in the concerned State or UT must be readily available, including in English, so that all convicts are aware of their option to apply for remission.
"Copies of the existing policy governing grant of remission shall be made available in each prison of State and a copy with its English translation shall be uploaded on the website of the government. A direction to be issued to jail superintendents to furnish the copies to convicts who are eligible. We also direct that whenever there are modifications in the policy, it is updated in line (with this directive)," the Court said.
The Court went on to disapprove the practice of not processing remission applications by convicts on the ground of their appeal against conviction is pending before a court.
"We make it clear that this is no ground to leave their remission application pending. The State must process the same," the Court said.
The Bench was hearing a suo motu public interest litigation (PIL) petition on the grant of bail in cases where appeals filed by prisoners against their criminal conviction have remained pending for long.
In such long pending cases, the Court had earlier called for enlarging the accused on bail unless there exist special circumstances for not doing so.
In the course of these hearings, the aspect of remission was also taken up by the Court. Last month, the Court ordered all State governments and UTs to ensure that a copy of decisions on remission applications must be immediately provided to the convict.
In Tuesday's order, the Court added remission rejection orders must be communicated within a week's time.
The Court further indicated that it will consider whether a person who is eligible for remission can be considered for the same automatically, without making him file an official remission application. The Court has asked Amicus Curiae Liz Mathew to submit suggestions on this aspect.
[Live Courtroom Coverage]