D RAJASEKHAR Vs. GOVT OF A P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner who claims to be a public- spirited person, swayed by News item that only 46 prisoners were released out of more than 500 such eligible persons after completion of ten years of sentence including remission, filed this petition as PIL, after furnishing details of prisoners undergoing sentence in various jails in the State, the offences for which they have been convicted and the sentences imposed in the relevant crime cases and the period of sentence undergone. He submits that not less than five hundred prisoners all over the State are eligible to be released by virtue of the policy decision taken by the Government of Andhra Pradesh to release prisoners on completion of ten years of imprisonment including remission i.e., seven years actual imprisonment and three years remission period. Petitioner states that instead of releasing all the eligible prisoners, the Government have released only 46 prisoners. He, therefore, has sought a direction to declare Para 5 of G.O.Ms.No. 17 Home (Prisons B.2) Department dated 17-1-2003 to be arbitrary, illegal, unjust and contrary to law and violative of fundamental rights guaranteed to the prisoners under Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India and also violative of Section 55 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 433 (b) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

(2.) The petitioner has alleged that there are more than 500 persons all over the State who were convicted for various offences including for the offences punishable under Sections 302 and 304 read with Sees. 148, 149 IPC and were sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life. By virtue of Section 55 of the Indian Penal Code, the Government is specifically empowered to commute the sentence of a prisoner undergoing imprisonment for life so as to ensure that the term of imprisonment does not exceed the total period of fourteen years. Likewise Section 433 of Criminal Procedure Code inter alia empowers the appropriate Government to commute a death sentence to any other punishment provided in Indian Penal Code and a life sentence to a sentence of imprisonment not exceeding fourteen years or fine. Sub-section (b) of Section 433 specifically provides that the Government may without the consent of a prisoner-undergoing sentence of imprisonment for life commute it to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 14 years or fine.

(3.) The petitioner thus alleged that Government in furtherance of the object of law and in exercise of powers under Section 59 of the Prisons Act and the A.P. Prison Rules, 1979 has constituted various committees for recommending remission of sentences in respect of persons undergoing imprisonment for life. It has been the consistent policy of the Government of Andhra Pradesh to grant remission to the prisoners governed by Sections 433 and 433-A of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Sentence of imprisonment of life in cases of persons with good conduct is remitted with a view to ensure a healthy body polity that suffered a defined reformative route to prisoner. The Indian Penal Code has recognised the role of the Government in interdicting sentence from time to time and this power is traceable to Article 161 of the Constitution of India. It empowers the Governor to grant pardons and to suspend, remit or commute sentences in cases of certain prisoners. Consistent with this policy, earlier the Government had issued various G.Os. for release of convicted persons sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life, who had completed 14 years of total sentence but ten years of actual sentence including those aged more than 65 years but had completed five years of actual sentence and a total sentence of seven years.