TMI Blog2019 (4) TMI 2137X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ith the absence of any consequence for not laying makes the provision directory and not mandatory. Part 3 of the Rajasthan Prison Rules, 1951, under the heading Remission System, in Rule 1(e) provides that the sentence for imprisonment for life or transportation of life shall be deemed to mean imprisonment for 20 years - Rule 2(e) of the Rules 2006, defines shortening of sentence to mean the reduction of that period of sentence of a prisoner which he has to serve in the prison upon a judicially pronounced sentence as a matter of grace on the part of the State and as a recognition of his good behaviour in the prison. Manifestly remission not being a matter of right, much less upon completion of 14 years of custody, but subject to rules framed in that regard, including complete denial of the same in specified circumstances, as a matter of State policy, nothing prevents the State from imposing restrictions in the manner done by Rule 8(2)(i) to consider claims for remission. It is, therefore, held that the High Court erred in striking down Rule 8(2)(i) of the Rules, 2006 on both counts. The Rule is held to be valid and consistent with the law. The impugned orders of the High ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (2) Every Rule made under this section shall be laid, as soon as may be after it is made, before the State Legislature. Rule 8(2) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub rule (i) (i) a prisoner who has been sentenced to imprisonment for life for any offence for which death penalty is one of the punishment provided by law or who has been sentenced to death but this sentence has been commuted under Section 433 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, into one of imprisonment for life, shall be considered only after he has served 14 years of actual imprisonment excluding remission but including the period of detention spent during enquiry, investigation or trial, on the condition that such a prisoner shall also have to earn minimum of 4 years of remission in order to be eligible for consideration. Section 433 A. Restriction on powers of remission and commutation in certain cases.- Notwithstanding anything contained in section 432, where a sentence of imprisonment for life is imposed on conviction of a person for an offence for which death is one of the punishments provided by laws, or where a sentence of death imposed on a person has been commuted under section 433 i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Government was ultra vires Article 14 of the Constitution of India as it would take approximately 18 years of imprisonment for a model prisoner to earn 4 years of remission, making it virtually impossible to be considered for shortening of sentence in terms of Section 433 A. Rule 8(2)(i) was clearly contrary to Section 433 A Cr.P.C. in view of Maru Ram (supra) to the extent that it restricts consideration for remission after 14 years. 7. We have considered the respective submissions. The plain language of Section 59(2) makes it manifest that there is no requirement for laying of the Rules before the Legislature prior to promulgation. No time limit for laying has been provided. As rightly urged, the use of words as soon as coupled with the absence of any consequence for not laying makes the provision directory and not mandatory. In Atlas Cycle (supra) it was observed: 22. In the instant case, it would be noticed that sub section (6) of Section 3 of the Act merely provides that every order made under Section 3 by the Central Government or by any officer or authority of the Central Government shall be laid before both Houses of Parliament, as soon as may be, after it is m ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... convicted person s natural life. 11. Section 432 Cr.P.C. provides for the power to suspend or remit sentences and also to refuse the same. Section 433 (b) Cr.P.C. provides for commuting a sentence of imprisonment for life to 14 years. Section 433 A Cr.P.C. provides that remission or commutation shall not enable release of the convict from prison unless the person had served at least 14 years of imprisonment. It, therefore, fixes a minimum period before which remission could not be considered. Any rule that may provide to consider remission before 14 years would obviously be bad in view of the statutory provision contained in the Code. In Union of India vs. V. Sriharan, (2016) 7 SCC 1, it was observed: 79. In this context, the submission of the learned Solicitor General on the interpretation of Section 433 A CrPC assumes significance. His contention was that under Section 433 A CrPC what is prescribed is only the minimum and, therefore, there is no restriction to fix it at any period beyond 14 years and up to the end of one s lifespan. We find substance in the said submission. When we refer to Section 433 A, we find that the expression used in the said section for the pu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
