LexStreakRead free →
Supreme Court of India· 24 February 2023

Which policy governs a life convict’s premature release — conviction date or the current one?

Rajkumar v. The State of Uttar Pradesh
2023 INSC 718 · Miscellaneous Application No. 2169 of 2022 in W.P.(Crl.) No. 36 of 2022
Coram: Saroj Kumari Gaur
🔖 Save this judgment🔔 Follow s.432 Code of Criminal Procedure…📬 Get today's judgments
View the original judgment PDFFree to read. To download it — or the LexStreak typeset copy with the headnote and Points of Law — create an account; downloads are part of the Pro plan.
Answer

The policy which was in existence on the date of the conviction governs the consideration of each case for premature release. In the event that a more liberalized policy is instituted subsequently, the case should be considered on the basis of the more liberalised provision.

Headnote

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)

In the Court's own words
Paragraph 5In several decisions of this Court, it has been held that the case of a convict for premature release is governed by the applicable policy on the date of conviction [State of Haryana Vs Jagdish[^3] and State of Haryana Vs Raj Kumar[^4]].
Paragraph 6The Standing Policy of the State of Uttar Pradesh as formulated on 1 August 2018 (as amended in 2021) contained a prohibition on the grant of premature release to convicts who had not completed the age of 60 years. The validity of the restriction was challenged before this Court in a batch of cases under Article 32 of the Constitution which eventually led to the judgment of Rashidul Jafar (supra). In the subsequent policy dated 27 May 2022, the bar on considering cases for premature release before a convict attains the age of 60 years stand lifted. This Court has hence directed that while, as a general principle, the policy which was in existence on the date of the conviction would govern the consideration of each case for premature release, in the event that a more liberalized policy is instituted subsequently, the case should be considered on the basis of the more liberalised provision.
Acts & Sections
s.432 Code of Criminal Procedure 1973s.433A Code of Criminal Procedure 1973Uttar Pradesh Prisoners (Release on Probation) Act 1938Art.161 Constitution of India

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.

Create my free account

Free forever plan · 30 seconds · data stays in India

Open the full judgment →

Also decided in this judgment
Can a State depart from its own Standing Policy in selecting cases for premature release?How must premature release provisions be applied across similarly circumstanced prisoners?
Plain-language answer prepared by the LexStreak Editorial Desk — verify against the judgment. Source: Supreme Court of India. Corrections