How must premature release provisions be applied across similarly circumstanced prisoners?

The provisions of the law must be applied equally to all persons, and those provisions have to be applied efficiently and transparently so as to obviate the grievance that the policy is being applied unevenly to similarly circumstanced persons. An arbitrary method adopted by the State is liable to grave abuse and is liable to lead to a situation where persons lacking resources, education and awareness suffer the most.

Uttar Pradesh Prisoners (Release on Probation) Act 1938 — Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 — s.432 — s.433A — Premature release — Policy on the date of conviction — Arbitrary yardstick — Premature release — Applicable policy — Date of conviction — Held: A convict’s case for premature release is governed by the policy in existence on the date of the conviction; where a more liberalised policy is instituted later, the case is to be considered on the basis of the more liberalised provision. (¶5, 6) Premature release — State bound by its own Rules and Standing Policy — Held further: Having formulated Rules and a Standing Policy, the State is bound by its own formulations of law and cannot adopt an arbitrary yardstick for picking up cases for premature release. (¶13) Premature release — Equal, efficient and transparent application — Held further: The provisions of the law must be applied equally to all persons, and efficiently and transparently, so as to obviate the grievance of uneven application; an arbitrary method is liable to grave abuse. Directions issued. (¶13, 15)

One judgment a day. That's the whole habit.

Read the full text of Rajkumar v. The State of Uttar Pradesh — and get the Supreme Court's output as a five-minute daily read, with plain-language headnotes and the questions each judgment settles.

Free forever plan · 30 seconds · data stays in India