Case Title: State of Haryana v. Rajkumar @ Bittu
According to the Supreme Court, the limitations set by Section 433-A of the Criminal Procedure Code will not apply to the Governor's ability to commute a sentence or grant a pardon under Article 161 of the Constitution.
Even if the prisoner has not been imprisoned for 14 years or more, the Governor has the authority to give pardons, reprieves, respites, and remissions of punishment, or to suspend, remit, or commute the sentence of any individual, the bench of Justices Hemant Gupta and AS Bopanna observed.
The court held that the Governor's power, while used with the guidance and assistance of the State, is not limited to the actual duration of imprisonment endured by the prisoner.
The court was hearing an appeal filed by the state against a Punjab and Haryana High Court ruling directing it to consider new rules regarding the use of powers granted by Article 161 of the Constitution. The issue on appeal was whether the policy from 12.4.2002 or the policy dated 13.8.2008 applied to the prisoner condemned on 25.3.2010.
The court stated that the remission under Article 161 of the Constitution will overrule Section 433-A of the Code, citing many judgements, including that of the Constitution bench in Union of India v. V. Sriharan.
In light of the overriding provision of Section 433-A of the Code, the court noted that a prisoner must serve a minimum of 14 years without remission in the case of an offence that carries a death sentence to benefit from a policy of remission framed by an appropriate government under Section 432 of the Code. The Governor's power to commute sentences or grant pardons, however, is unaffected by any such restrictions or limitations, according to the bench.
Setting aside the High Court's directions, the bench observed that the power of remission is to be exercised by the State Government, as an appropriate Government, if the prisoner has undergone 14 years of actual imprisonment in cases falling under the scope of Section 433-A of the Code, and that if the imprisonment is less than 14 years, the Governor can exercise the power of premature release with the aid and advice of the State Government.
In this case, the prisoner had served approximately 12 years of his sentence.
"The case for premature release of the prisoner in terms of the policy of the State Government dated 13.8.2008, the policy, which was applicable on the date of his conviction, can be considered only after he completes 14 years of actual imprisonment. However, the State Government can consider the prisoner in question for premature release after undergoing imprisonment for less than 14 years only under Article 161 of the Constitution," the Court said.