Patna High Court delivered six judgments on November 13, 2025 in Rakesh Kumar Trivedi vs. The Bihar Staff Selection Commission & Ors., Sribhagvan Kumar vs. The State of Bihar, Rahul Kumar Singh vs. The State Bank of India & Ors., Yogendra Bhagat vs. The State of Bihar through the Chief Secretary, Government of Bihar, Patna, Binod Sah @ Binod Kumar Sah @ Binod Kumar vs. The State of Bihar through the Chief Secretary, Government of Bihar, Patna and Neeraj Kumar @ Neeraj Singh vs. The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary (Home), Police Department Bihar, Patna.
In Yogendra Bhagat vs. The State of Bihar through the Chief Secretary, Government of Bihar, Patna & Ors. (2025), Justice Arun Kumar Jha delivered a 4-page long judgement dated November 13, 2025, wherein, he concluded:"this writ application is disposed of with direction to the respondent authorities to place the case of the petitioner for his premature release before the State Sentence Remission Board within six weeks and the State Sentence Remission Board would take a decision within six weeks thereafter considering the state policy and judicial pronouncement as the case of the petitioner appears to be covered under the 1984 policy." This case arose out of PS. case of 2024 from Patna.
The other seven respondents were: The State Sentence Remission Board through the Principal Secretary, Home Department, Government of Bihar, Joint Secretary-cum-Director (Administration), Home Deptt. (Prison), Bihar, Secretary, Law Department, Government of Bihar, Patna, Additional Director General of Police, Criminal Investigation Department, Bihar, Inspector General, Prisons and Correctional Services, Bihar Patna, Assistant Inspector General, Prisons and Correctional Services, Bihar and Jail Superintendent, Special Central Jail, Bhagalpur.
This writ application prayed for issuance of an appropriate writ in the nature of CERTIORARI for quashing the decision of the State Remission Board dated November 1, 2021 and the same was communicated to all concerned vide letter no. 4679 dated April 21, 2022 issued under the signature of Assistant Inspector General, Prisons and Correctional Services, Bihar, the Respondent No. 7, so far it related to the petitioner, whereby and where under the proposal for grant of pre-mature release was rejected on the ground that there was no favourable report of Superintendent of Police and Presiding Judge as also as per clause (iv) (ka) of Notification No. 3106 dated December 10, 2002, the petitioner was not eligible for consideration of his pre-mature release notwithstanding the fact that in the writ application filed by the petitioner being Cr.W.J.C. No. 209 of 2020, the High Court vide judgment and order dated August 16, 2021 held that the petitioner was convicted prior to July 2, 2007 and thus his case was required to be considered in the light of 1984 policy contained in letter dated January 21, 1984. It also prayed for issuance of an appropriate writ in the nature of MANDAMUS, commanding and directing the Respondent Authorities to consider the case of the petitioner for grant pre-mature release pursuant to the 1984 provision dated January 21, 1984 on the ground that the petitioner had already completed 14 years of his physical incarceration and 20 years with remission on September 6, 2013 and now he had completed about 25 years of his physical incarceration.
The counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner was convicted vide judgment dated February 21, 2006 under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code in Sessions Trial of 2000/44 of 2003 and was sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life vide order dated February 22, 2006 by the Additional District & Sessions Judge, F.T.C. No. IV, Gopalganj. The counsel also submitted that the case of the petitioner was not considered for remission though he has completed more than 14 years of his actual incarceration and more than 20 years with remission. The counsel also submitted that earlier prayer for premature release of the petitioner was rejected vide order dated November 1, 2021. The counsel also submitted that the case of
the petitioner is covered under the 1984 policy which was prevailing during relevant time, i.e., on the date of conviction of the petitioner and was also covered by the decision of the High Court in the case of Md. Allauddin Ansari & Ors. vs. The State of Bihar and Ors. (vide order dated 22.12.2022 passed in Cr.W.J.C. No. 861 of 2021 & analogous case).
The counsel appearing on behalf of the State- respondents submitted that appropriate orders may be passed and the authorities will consider the case of the petitioner for his premature release in the light of the Rule VI (d) of Notification No. 3106 dated December 10, 2002, which stipulates rejection of the case of a prisoner for premature release on one or more occasion by the Remission Board will not be a bar for reconsideration of his case. However, the reconsideration of the case of a convict already rejected could be done only after the expiry of a period of one year from the date of last consideration of his case.
Similar judgement was passed by Justice Jha in Binod Sah @ Binod Kumar Sah @ Binod Kumar vs. The State of Bihar through the Chief Secretary, Government of Bihar, Patna (2025).
No comments:
Post a Comment