Remission Policy in India- Bilkis Bano Case- Explained Pointwise

The Supreme Court has struck down the remission granted to 11 men convicted in the Bilkis Bano gang rape case of 2002. The court has ruled that the Gujarat government’s decision to remit their sentences and set them free was illegal.

What is Remission? 

Remission- Remission refers to the reduction or cancellation of a penalty or punishment imposed by a court. It provides the government or relevant authorities with the discretion to either completely release a person from their sentence or reduce the severity of the sentence.

*Remission is distinct from both furlough and parole. Furlough and parole refers to a break from prison life. However in remission there is a reduction in sentence, while the nature of the sentence remains untouched.

Remission not an automatic process- Remission is not an automatic process. It is subject to the discretion of the relevant authorities. The specific procedures and criteria for remission can differ based on the legal framework governing a particular offense.

What are the Constitutional provisions laws and grounds that govern remission in India?

Constitutional Provisions

Statutory Provisions

SC Judgements

Grounds for remission
In ‘Laxman Naskar v. Union of India’ (2000), the SC laid down five grounds on which remission is considered-

a. Nature of Crime affecting the society
b. Chance of the crime being repeated in future
c. Convict loosing the potentiality to commit crime
d. Pupose being served by keeping the convict in prison
e. Socio-economic conditions of the convict’s family.

Convicts serving life sentences are entitled to seek remission only after serving a minimum of 14 years. Data from Prison Statistics, 2020 show that 61% of convicts in jail are serving life sentences.

What are the famous remission cases in India?

These cases illustrate instances where the question of remission or early release from imprisonment became a matter of public debate and legal scrutiny.

What are the arguments provided in favour of provision of remission? 

The concept of remission in India, is associated with certain advantages, both from the perspective of the individuals serving sentences and the criminal justice system. Some of the potential advantages are mentioned below-

1. Rehabilitation and Reintegration- Granting of remission is an acknowledgment of positive change in an individual convicted of crime. This fosters the idea of rehabilitation and reintegration into society.

2. Humanitarian approach of reformation- The concept of Remission is grounded in humanitarian considerations such as old age, health conditions and other compassionate reasons.

3. Prevents overcrowding in Prisons- Remission helps in alleviating the issue of overcrowding in prisons by reducing the number of individuals serving sentences. This contributes to better living conditions for prisoners and improve the overall management of correctional facilities.

4. Development of Good Behavior of the prisoners- The possibility of remission serves as an incentive for prisoners to exhibit good behavior, follow prison rules, and actively engage in rehabilitation programs. This creates a positive environment within correctional facilities.

5. Improvement of Efficiency of Judicial and Correctional System- Remission enables authorities to focus resources on cases where incarceration is deemed necessary while providing an avenue for the release of individuals who may no longer pose a significant threat.

6. Cost Savings- Remission results in cost savings associated with the maintenance and management of prisons.

What are the arguments provided against the provision of remission? 

While remission in India has certain advantages, it also poses potential disadvantages and challenges. Hence some critics argue against the provision of remission.

1. Concerns About Public Safety- Critics argue that in certain cases, the focus on rehabilitation and good behavior might not adequately address the risk to public safety associated with certain offenders involved in crimes of heinous nature.

2. Controversial Cases and Public Outcry- Decisions regarding remission, especially in high-profile or controversial cases, can lead to public outcry. For ex– Remission to convicts of Rajiv Gandhi Murder case by Karunanidhi.

3. Inconsistency in Application- The discretionary nature of remission may lead to inconsistency in its application. Similar cases with similar circumstances might be treated differently, raising questions about fairness and equality before the law.

4. Potential for Political Influence- There is a risk of political interference or influence in the decision-making process for remission. Politically motivated decisions could compromise the principles of justice and the integrity of the legal system. For ex- Alleged political influence in Bilkis Bano Case.

5. Undermines Deterrence– Critics argue that the availability of remission may undermine the deterrent effect of criminal penalties. If individuals believe they can be released early for good behavior, it might reduce the perceived severity of consequences for criminal actions.

6. Victim and Survivor Concerns- In cases where remission is granted, the concerns and rights of victims or their survivors may be overlooked. Victims might feel that the legal system is not adequately addressing their needs, particularly if the release of an offender causes distress or fear.

7. Lack of Transparency- The decision-making process for remission is not always transparent, leading to skepticism about the criteria considered by authorities. Lack of transparency can erode public trust in the criminal justice system.

What Should be the Way Forward?

It’s essential to strike a balance between recognizing positive behavioral changes in prisoners and ensuring the safety and well-being of society. Following should be the way forward-

1. Careful consideration of individual cases- The cases must be carefully considered for remission. All the principles laid by SC in the ‘Laxman Naskar v. Union of India’ (2000) must be justified by the authorities in their remission judgement.

2. Transparency in decision-making- The remission process must be transparent and politically unbiased.

3. Fairness and reasonability- The remission process should be fair and reasonable, and based on a set of relevant parameters such as whether the crime involved affected society at large, whether the convict retained the potential for committing similar offences or is capable of reform.

4. Rational and comprehensive remission Policy- The remission policy must encompass humanitarian considerations and the convicts’ scope for reform, without violating the rule of law or societal interests.