Remission of a Sentence Section 473

Section 473(1), BNSS 2023

When any person has been sentenced to punishment for an offence, the appropriate Government may, at any time, without conditions or upon any conditions which the person sentenced accepts, suspend the execution of his sentence or remit the whole or any part of the punishment to which he has been sentenced.

📖 Sarat Chandra Rabha v. Khagendranath Nath, AIR 1961 SC 334

Facts: A person convicted of an offence had the sentence remitted by an order of the appropriate Government, and the question arose whether that remission removed the disqualification which the conviction attracted — in effect, whether a remitted sentence is to be treated as though it had never been imposed.

Held: The Supreme Court held that an order of remission does not in any way affect the conviction and does not wipe out the offence. What remission does is to affect the execution of the sentence: it reduces the period of imprisonment the convict must undergo, but it leaves the order of conviction and the sentence as passed exactly where they were. The Court drew the contrast with a pardon, which is a constitutional or sovereign act and may wipe out the conviction and all its consequences so that in the eye of the law the offender is as innocent as if he had never committed the offence. Remission is not of that character: it is a statutory power affecting the serving of the sentence, and the convict remains a person who has been convicted and sentenced. It followed that a disqualification attaching to the conviction was not removed by the remission.

Ratio: Remission affects only the execution of the sentence, reducing the period to be served. It does not wipe out the conviction or the offence, and the disqualifications attaching to a conviction survive it. Only a pardon can reach the conviction.

📖 State of Haryana v. Jagdish, (2010) 4 SCC 216

Facts: A convict serving a life sentence sought premature release, and the question arose as to which remission policy applied — the one in force when he was convicted, or a later and less favourable one — and what right, if any, a convict has in relation to remission.

Held: The Supreme Court held that a convict undergoing a life sentence has no right to be released on completing any particular period, but that he does have a right to have his case considered for premature release in accordance with the applicable policy, and that such consideration must be fair and not arbitrary. On the question of which policy applies, the Court held that the convict is entitled to have his case considered under the policy in force on the date of his conviction, and that a subsequent policy which is less favourable cannot be applied to his detriment; where a later policy is more beneficial, he may claim its benefit. The Court reasoned that the sentence is imposed at conviction and the convict’s legitimate expectations are formed by the regime then existing, and that applying a harsher policy retrospectively would in substance enhance the punishment after it had been imposed.

Ratio: A life convict has no right to release on completing any period, but has a right to have his case considered fairly under the remission policy. The policy in force on the date of conviction applies; a later, less favourable policy cannot be applied to his detriment.

Section 475, BNSS 2023 — the restriction

Notwithstanding anything contained in section 473, where a sentence of imprisonment for life is imposed on conviction of a person for an offence for which death is one of the punishments provided by law, or where a sentence of death imposed on a person has been commuted under section 474 into one of imprisonment for life, such person shall not be released from prison unless he had served at least fourteen years of imprisonment.

⚠ Section 475 is a restriction, not a right

It tells the Government what it may not do. It does not tell the Government what it must do, and it confers no right on the convict to be released at fourteen years.

A prisoner serving life therefore cannot say “I have completed fourteen years, therefore I must be released”. He can say “I have completed fourteen years, therefore my case must be considered” — and if it is not considered, or is considered arbitrarily, that failure is justiciable.

Imprisonment for life means imprisonment for the whole of the remaining period of the convict’s natural life. There is no rule of law converting it into a term of years, and remission earned under prison rules does not by itself entitle him to release: it becomes operative only when the appropriate Government passes an order under section 473.

And the power under section 473 is executive. A court sentencing an offender cannot direct that he be remitted, nor forbid it — though a court may, in an appropriate case, impose a fixed-term sentence in place of death, which then runs according to its own terms.

The position stated shortly

1. Section 473: the appropriate Government may, at any time, without conditions or on conditions the person accepts, remit the whole or any part of the punishment.

2. Remission reduces the sentence. It does not wipe out the conviction or the offence, and the disqualifications attaching to a conviction survive it: Sarat Chandra Rabha.

3. Only a pardon under Article 72 or 161 can reach the conviction itself and its consequences.

4. A remitted sentence keeps its character: a life convict released on remission has still been sentenced to imprisonment for life.

5. Remission may be conditional, and the conditions must be accepted. On breach, it may be cancelled, and the person arrested without warrant and remanded to serve the unexpired portion.

6. Section 473(2): the Government may require the presiding Judge to state his opinion with reasons and forward a certified copy of the record.

7. Imprisonment for life means imprisonment for the whole of the remaining period of natural life. There is no rule converting it into a term of years.

8. Remission earned under prison rules does not by itself entitle a life convict to release; it operates only when the Government passes an order under section 473.

9. A life convict has no right to be released on completing any period, but has a right to be considered fairly under the applicable policy — and the policy in force on the date of conviction applies where a later one is less favourable: State of Haryana v. Jagdish.

10. Section 475 imposes a floor of fourteen years where life imprisonment was imposed for an offence carrying death, or where a death sentence has been commuted. It is a restriction on the Government, not a right in the convict.