9911796707
TMI Blog2003 (2) TMI 556X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... an offence of rape punishable under Section 376 IPC, the Government of Haryana, on the eve of the Independence Day, issued a notification dated 14.8.1995 in exercise of its power vested under Section 432 of the Code granting remission of prison sentence to all convicts except those excluded in the said notification. The said notification excluded such convicts who had been convicted for the offences of rape, dowry death, abduction and murder of a child below 14 years, unnatural offences, robbery, persons sentenced under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (NDPS), TADA, the Foreigners' Act, Passport Act, the persons detained under the detention laws, the persons sentenced under Sections 2 and 3 of the Criminal Laws Amendm ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... because such power of restriction has already been exercised by the Parliament while amending Section 433A of the Code. It also held that the classification of convicts based on the nature of offences committed by them for the purpose of granting remission is impermissible and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution. Though the State of Haryana had preferred an appeal to this Court as against the said judgment of the High Court in Suresh Kumar (supra), the said appeal -- [Crl. A No. 726 of 2000] -- came to be dismissed by this Court on a concession made by the learned counsel for the parties, without going into the question of classification. 5. In this appeal, learned counsel appearing for the State contended that the High Court was i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nder Section 433A of the Code. 6. We will first take up for consideration the argument accepted by the High Court in the impugned judgment that the impugned classification is arbitrary, unreasonable and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution. While considering the challenge based on Article 14 as to the arbitrariness in the impugned classification, the court has to examine whether the impugned classification satisfies certain constitutional mandates or not. They are (i) that the classification must be founded on an intelligible differentia which distinguishes persons or things that are grouped together from others left out of the group; (ii) that the differentia must have a rational relationship with the objects sought to be achieved ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... " (emphasis supplied) 9. In Maru Ram etc. etc. v. Union of India and Anr. 1980 CriLJ 1440 , this Court while repelling an argument of discrimination in regard to the sentence to be imposed in murder cases, held: "The logic is lucid although its wisdom, in the light of penological thought, is open to doubt. We have earlier stated the parameters of judicial restraint and, as at present advised, we are not satisfied that the classification is based on an irrational differentia unrelated to the unitive end of social defence. Suffice it to say here, the classification, if due respect to Parliament's choice is given, cannot be castigated as a capricious enough to attract the lethal consequence of Article 13 read with Article 14.& ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cided not grant remission to these offenders/offences which carry life imprisonment, should not be granted remission, is justified in doing so. 13. Similarly, the offences under the NDPS and the TADA Acts, apart from carrying heavy penal sentences are offences which could be termed as offences having serious adverse effect on the society, cognisance of which is required to be taken by the State while granting remission, therefore, they can also be classified as offences which should be kept out of the purview of remission. 14. The offences enumerated in Sections 121 to 130 IPC are the offences against the State, though some of them may not be punishable with life imprisonment, still taking into consideration the nature of offence which un ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ence to a single convict or with reference to a class of convicts so long as such classification is a valid classification. However, by enacting Section 433A in the Code the Parliament has only restricted the power of the appropriate Government to grant remission to the convicts mentioned in that Section. It does not do anything more. To grant or not to grant is the power vested in the appropriate Government under Section 432 which the said Government can exercise either by granting remission to all convicts except those mentioned in Section 433A or by restricting the remission to a class of convicts provided such classification is valid. The High Court in the case of Suresh Kumar (supra) erred in holding that the Andhra Pradesh High Court ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
