MAHUYA CHAKRABORTY Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Two primary grounds have been taken by the petitioner in challenging the decision of the State Sentence Review Board, West Bengal (SSRB) in rejecting the application of the present petitioner, the wife of a convict who was handed a life sentence. Those are that the SSRB was not properly constituted and that the grounds cited for such rejection by the SSRB are not in consonance with the consistent view taken by the Supreme Court and this Court as well as the other High Courts.

(2.) Learned counsel places reliance on the judgment of the Supreme Court rendered in Rajo alias Rajwa alias Rajendra Mandal vs. The State of Bihar where the Supreme Court categorically observed that the aim, ultimate goal of imprisonment, even in the most serious crime, is reformative after the offender undergoes a sufficiently long spell of punishment through imprisonment.

(3.) Apart from other considerations on the nature of the crime, whether it affected society at large, the chance of its recurrence, etc. it was held that the appropriate Government should, while considering the potential of the convict to commit crimes in the future, whether there remains any fruitful purpose of continued incarceration, and the socio-economic conditions, review the convict's age, state of health, familial relationships and possibility of reintegration, extent of earned remission, and the postconviction conduct including, but not limited to, whether the convict has attained any educational qualification whilst in custody, volunteer services offered, job/work done, jail conduct, whether they were engaged in any socially aimed or productive activity, and the overall development as a human being.