Breaking | Remissions To Be Considered By States Without Application From Accused; Once Granted Not To Be Cancelled Without Reason: SC

The Supreme Court today pronounced Judgment in the suo motu plea concerning the strategy for granting bail.

The Bench of Justice Abhay S. Oka and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan emphasized that remission of a convict’s sentence should not require an application from the accused, as it is the State’s duty to consider such cases suo motu.

The Court further stated that remission cannot be revoked arbitrarily without proper reasoning and due process. The Court also noted that several other directions have been issued, and it will later assess their implementation by the authorities.

"For remission, the accused need not apply; the state will consider. I have said that without recording reasons and not giving bearing, remission cannot be cancelled. Then later on we will see that these are implemented…Many other directions are also given," the Bench pronounced.

It is to be noted that in February 2023, the Court had asked the concerned Courts to consider modifying the bail conditions imposed on the undertrial prisoners if the bonds were not furnished within a month. The Court had noted that a number of undertrial prisoners are in jail even after being granted bail.

The Bench had directed, “In cases where the undertrial or convict requests that he can furnish bail bond or sureties once released, then in an appropriate case, the Court may consider granting temporary bail for a specified period to the accused so that he can furnish bail bond or sureties. … If the bail bonds are not furnished within one month from the date of grant bail, the concerned Court may suo moto take up the case and consider whether the conditions of bail require modification/ relaxation.”

The Bench had noted that one of the reasons that delay the release of the accused/convict is the insistence upon local surety and therefore, it is suggested that in such cases, the Courts may not impose the condition of local surety.

The Court had also called upon the Government of India to discuss this issue with NALSA so that necessary directions if any, can be passed and said that the ASG would obtain instructions in that regard by the next date. The Court had further asserted that instead of looking to the suggestions and directions sought, a more appropriate course of action would be the Amicus to look into such issues on behalf of the NALSA and accordingly make suggestions to the Court taking them as inputs.

Cause Title: In Re Policy Strategy for Grant of Bail [SMW(Crl) No. 000004/2021]