Summary
| Category | Data |
|---|---|
| Court | Supreme Court of India |
| Case Number | Crl.A. No.-004335-004335 – 2025 |
| Diary Number | 4178/2025 |
| Judge Name | HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE K. VINOD CHANDRAN |
| Bench | HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE; HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE K. VINOD CHANDRAN |
| Concurring or Dissenting Judges | CJI B. R. GAVAI (concurring) |
| Precedent Value | Binding authority on executive remission decisions |
| Overrules / Affirms | Affirms the validity of the 2010 remission guidelines but narrows classification |
| Type of Law | Criminal law (remission under executive guidelines) |
| Questions of Law | Whether a premeditated murder committed to uphold family prestige falls under Clause 3(b) (22-year rule) or Category 4(d) (24-year rule) of the 2010 guidelines |
| Ratio Decidendi |
The Court held that where a life-sentence convict commits murder with premeditation to protect family prestige, Clause 3(b) of the 2010 remission guidelines applies. Such classification entitles release after 22 years rather than 24 years under Category 4(d). Merely three months’ additional custody adds no substantive benefit, and the convict’s age (just over 18 at the time of offence) further supports immediate release. |
| Facts as Summarised by the Court | The appellant and another premeditated attack on the deceased (and friend) motivated by the deceased’s relationship with the appellant’s sister, alleged to tarnish family honour; sentenced under Sections 302/307 IPC; in custody for over 20 years. |
Practical Impact
| Category | Impact |
|---|---|
| Binding On | All executive bodies and subordinate courts tasked with calculating remission periods |
| Persuasive For | High Courts and executive remission boards in other States |
What’s New / What Lawyers Should Note
- Clarifies that murders committed to uphold family prestige fall under Clause 3(b) (22-year rule) rather than Category 4(d) (24-year rule) of the 2010 remission guidelines.
- Holds that a marginal extension of custody (three months) confers no added benefit and may be quashed.
- Emphasises consideration of juvenile age proximity (just over 18) in remission decisions.
- Establishes that the executive must adhere strictly to the classification criteria in the 2010 Government Resolution.
- Confers immediate release where factual matrix clearly triggers Clause 3(b).
Summary of Legal Reasoning
- Examination of Government Resolution No. RLP No.1006/CR621/PRS-3 dated 15.03.2010, which categorises life convicts for premature release.
- Identification of Clause 3(b) covering “crime committed with premeditation individually or by a gang, for upholding family prestige.”
- Comparison with Category 4(d), which applies to “murder jointly committed with premeditation.”
- Analysis of the appellant’s motive (protecting family honour) and facts (attack on deceased for his relation with the appellant’s sister) to satisfy Clause 3(b).
- Calculation of custodial period (20 years 7 months as of 30.09.2024, nearing 22 years).
- Conclusion that three additional months under Category 4(d) would be arbitrary and that immediate release is warranted.
- Direction for immediate release, noting age factor (just over 18 at offence).
Arguments by the Parties
Appellant (Petitioner):
- The premeditated attack aimed to protect family prestige, squarely attracting Clause 3(b).
- He has served nearly 22 years; an additional two years under Category 4(d) is unwarranted.
State (Respondents):
- The guidelines are clear that murders with premeditation committed jointly fall under Category 4(d), requiring 24 years’ custody.
Factual Background
The appellant was convicted under Sections 302 and 307 IPC for a jointly premeditated murder aimed at protecting his sister’s honour. He has been in custody for over 20 years. The Maharashtra Government’s remission order classified him under Category 4(d) of the 2010 guidelines (24-year rule). The appellant petitioned that Clause 3(b) (22-year rule) correctly applies given the family-prestige motive.
Statutory Analysis
- Government Resolution No. RLP No.1006/CR621/PRS-3 dated 15.03.2010 sets out remission categories for life convicts.
- Clause 3(b): crimes with premeditation for upholding family prestige – release after 22 years.
- Category 4(d): joint premeditated murders – release after 24 years.
- Sections 302 and 307 IPC provided the underlying convictions but did not affect classification under the guidelines.
Alert Indicators
- ✔ Precedent Followed – affirms and refines application of the 2010 remission guidelines.