State of Haryana & Ors. Vs Raj Kumar @ Bittu (Supreme Court of India)
The appeals challenged a judgment of the Punjab and Haryana High Court, which had directed the State to consider framing a fresh remission policy, particularly concerning the exercise of powers under Article 161 of the Constitution, and to examine the feasibility of giving such policy retrospective operation. Pending such decision, the High Court had directed that powers under Sections 432 and 433 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC) be exercised in accordance with the policy dated 13.08.2008 while adhering to the restriction contained in Section 433-A.
The Supreme Court identified the principal issue as whether the policy dated 12.04.2002 or the policy dated 13.08.2008 governed the premature release of a prisoner convicted on 25.03.2010. It examined the remission policies issued by the State of Haryana, the provisions of Article 161 of the Constitution, and Sections 432, 433 and 433-A of the CrPC.
The Court observed that, after the coming into force of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the power to issue general or special orders relating to remission is traceable to Section 432(5) of the CrPC. Consequently, remission policies framed after 1974 are statutory in nature. It further held that even where a policy does not expressly refer to the statutory source of power, or cites an incorrect provision, its validity is not affected if the power exists under law. Accordingly, both the policies dated 12.04.2002 and 13.08.2008 were held to be statutory policies.
