Plea for remission to be considered as per policy of State where crime is committed: Supreme Court

The Supreme Court recently observed that an application of remission or premature release of a convict should be considered in accordance with the policy of the State where the crime is actually committed and not the State where the trial was transferred to and concluded [Radeshyam Bhagwandas Shah @ Lala Vakil v. State of Gujarat and Another]..A Division Bench of Justices Ajay Rastogi and Vikram Nath was of the view that under Section 432(7) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) 1973, the power to remit sentence is in the hands of the appropriate government, which can either be the Central or the State government but there cannot be concurrent jurisdiction of two State governments..The top court was considering a writ petition filed by a prisoner seeking direction to the State of Gujarat to consider his application for premature release under the policy dated July 9, 1992 which was existing at the time of his conviction.The petitioner was serving rigorous imprisonment for life after being found guilty of offences under Sections 302, 376(2)(e)(g) read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). The crime was committed in Gujarat in 2004.He had filed a petition for premature release under Sections 433 and 433A of the CrPC seeking premature release stating that he had undergone more than 15 years and 4 months in jail. But his petition filed in the Gujarat High Court came to be dismissed on the ground that since the trial has been concluded in the State of Maharashtra, the application for premature release has to be filed in the Maharashtra and not in Gujarat..The Supreme Court noted that the crime was admittedly committed in the Gujarat and ordinarily the trial was to be concluded in the same State and in terms of Section 432(7) CrPC, the appropriate government in the ordinary course would be the Gujarat government.But the Court noted that the trial was transferred by the Supreme Court to Maharashtra due to exceptional circumstances. However, soon after the trial was completed, the case stood transferred back to Gujarat, the top court observed. Therefore, since the crime happened in Gujarat, all further proceedings including plea for remission has to be considered as per the policy of Gujarat government. "Once the crime was committed in the State of Gujarat, after the trial been concluded and judgment of conviction came to be passed, all further proceedings have to be considered including remission or premature release, as the case may be, in terms of the policy which is applicable in the State of Gujarat where the crime was committed and not the State where the trial stands transferred and concluded for exceptional reasons," the judgment said. Consequently, the Court allowed the petition and directed the State of Gujarat to consider the application of the petitioner for premature release..[Read Judgment]