In a significant development concerning prisoner rights and rehabilitation, the Kerala High Court has directed the State Government to consider the premature release of prisoners who have completed a deemed term of 20 years of imprisonment, as per Rule 377 of the Kerala Prisons and Correctional Services (Management) Rules, 2014, and have received favorable recommendations from the Advisory Committee for premature release. The Court emphasized the importance of adhering to established legal provisions and ensuring that prisoners who have demonstrated good conduct and rehabilitation are not denied the opportunity for early release without justifiable reasons.
The case under consideration involved two life convicts who had been incarcerated for over 26 years, including periods of remission. Despite their long tenure in prison and favorable recommendations from the Advisory Committee, their premature release was denied by the State Government. The government cited the nature of their offenses, which included the murder of a widow and a mother, as grounds for rejection. However, the Court found this reasoning insufficient and directed the government to reconsider their cases in light of the legal provisions and the rehabilitative goals of the correctional system.
The Court's directive underscores the principle that the purpose of imprisonment extends beyond mere punishment; it encompasses the reformation and rehabilitation of the convict. Denying premature release to individuals who have shown signs of reform and have served a substantial portion of their sentence contradicts these rehabilitative objectives. The Court highlighted that the denial of premature release not only affects the individual convict but also undermines public faith in the justice system's commitment to reformative justice.
Furthermore, the Court noted that the State Government's rejection of the Advisory Committee's recommendations lacked adequate justification. The government is mandated to provide clear and reasonable grounds when deviating from the Advisory Committee's advice, ensuring transparency and accountability in the decision-making process. Arbitrary decisions without substantiated reasons can lead to violations of constitutional rights, including the right to equality and the right to life and personal liberty.
In its ruling, the Kerala High Court emphasized the need for the State Government to act expeditiously and in accordance with the law. The Court directed that the cases of the two convicts be reconsidered within two months from the date of receipt of the certified copy of the judgment. This timeline aims to prevent unnecessary delays and ensure that the rights of the prisoners are respected without further hindrance.
The decision also serves as a reminder to the State Government and other authorities involved in the correctional system about the importance of adhering to legal provisions and the principles of justice. It reinforces the notion that the criminal justice system should not only punish but also aim to rehabilitate and reintegrate individuals into society. By doing so, it upholds the constitutional values enshrined in Articles 14 (Right to Equality) and 21 (Right to Life and Personal Liberty) of the Indian Constitution.
In conclusion, the Kerala High Court's directive to the State Government to reconsider the premature release of long-term prisoners with favorable Advisory Committee reports is a significant step towards ensuring that the correctional system fulfills its rehabilitative role. It highlights the importance of adhering to legal provisions, providing transparent and reasonable justifications for decisions, and upholding the constitutional rights of individuals. This decision not only impacts the two convicts involved but also sets a precedent for similar cases, reinforcing the commitment to justice and rehabilitation in the Indian legal system.
0 Comments
Thank you for your response. It will help us to improve in the future.