Revisiting Remission as a Right of Prisoners in India in the Light of New Criminal Laws

Abstract

The introduction of new criminal laws, effective July 1, 2024, has captivated various stakeholders, including state legislatures, legal scholars, law enforcement agencies, judges, attorneys, and citizens directly or indirectly influenced by the legislation. There is considerable interest in understanding the implications of these laws on domestic application and their extraterritorial effects, including both within and beyond India. The impact of these laws will be comprehended over time, particularly regarding how this legislation represents an enhancement over the Colonial laws that have been in practice since independence. However, the interpretation of the statutory provisions reveals the legislative intent, here in this article, concerning the executive discretion granted to the accused in matters of premature release in the form of remission. In January, the Supreme Court condemned the Gujarat government for collaborating with convicts in the Bilkis Bano case, as it set aside the remission of 11 convicts. The release of Anand Mohan by the Bihar Government was premature on remission after amending the Prison Manual Rule Number 481 of the State. The Apex Court asked him to submit his passport and report fortnightly to the local police station. These are a few of the many instances questioning and highlighting the lacunae in the remission policy exercised by the executives. This article aims to understand the remission policy currently working in India, the flaws existing during such exercises, any change, if any, that has been brought up in the new Criminal Law, and how to further bring positive changes to balance the accused's rights to remission and victims' unending sufferings, considering international legislation and other recognized frameworks of the law. This will encompass doctrinal and non-doctrinal research in the form of comparative research across various criminal justice jurisdictions.