The Supreme Court on Monday pulled up the Sentence Review Board of the Union Territory of Puducherry for not complying with an earlier order to decide on a prisoner's application for remission (early release from prison) [Karuna @ Manoharan v. Union Territory of Puducherry].
A Division Bench of Justices Abhay S Oka and Augustine George Masih warned that contempt of court proceedings may be initiated against the remission body's chairperson (Home Minister) and other members if they continue treating court orders so carelessly.
"If an order of this Court is taken so carelessly, then we will issue contempt notice to ones who do it - no matter if it is the State Home Minister," a visibly upset Justice Oka said.
The case before the Court concerned petitions by two prisoners (petitioners) who had been in jail for over 20 years following their conviction in a murder case. They had been sentenced to life imprisonment. They have also been convicted for attempting to murder several police personnel using an explosive substance.
On January 25, the top court had allowed a remission plea of a co-convict, Satish, thereby overturning the sentence review board's earlier decision to reject his premature release plea.
On August 27, the Court directed the sentence review board to consider the petitioners' plea for premature release as well, in line with the top court's January 25 order in Satish's case.
However, when the matter was taken up Monday, the Court found that the review board was yet to decide on the matter.
The Court viewed this lapse seriously, and proceeded to direct the Inspector General of Prisons (who is a member-secretary of the review board) to file an affidavit explaining the board's conduct.
"Specific direction of this court was to reconsider the plea of present accused in light of order passed in case of other co-accused. We find in minutes of board that there was no consideration of such order. Prima facie the centre review board has committed violation of this court's order. We therefore direct Inspector General of Prison to file an affidavit with regard to conduct of the board," the Court ordered.
Further, considering his long incarceration in prison, the Court also ordered the release of one of the petitioners on interim bail while listing case next on January 10.
The Court also reiterated its direction to decide on the petitioners' plea for premature release by then.
[Live Courtroom Exchange]