Antecedents and conduct in jail must be considered for considering premature release of a convict: Supreme Court

The Supreme Court in its judgment delivered on Wednesday granted conditional premature release to convicts who displayed good conduct during their sentence of nearly two decades in prison. .While granting this early release based on good conduct, the Supreme Court said that a balance between individual and societal welfare can be struck through this move by ensuring that the convicts no longer suffer a curtailment of their liberty and are also not a threat to the society..This verdict came from a Bench of Justices NV Ramana, Surya Kant and Hrishikesh Roy that said that the convicts who were serving term for their crime of kidnapping for ransom have "suffered the consequences of their actions" while being in prison for two decades..During this period of over twenty years, the conduct of the two convicts had been more than satisfactory according to the affidavit filed by the State of Uttar Pradesh in this regard. Including a period of remission, they have served a total of 22 years in prison and still have substantial years ahead of them. .With the convicts being about 54 and 43 years in age, the case made out against their release by the State harped on their young age. However, the Court's view was different which said that it is in fact on account of the age of the convicts that the matter needs to be viewed through the "prism of positivity." The judgment said,."Given their age, their case ought to be viewed through a prism of positivity. They retain the ability to reintegrate with society and can spend many years leading a peaceful, disciplined, and normal human life. Such a hopeful expectation is further concritised by their conduct in jail.".Moreover, the Court also underscored that the convicts had no material criminal antecedents and their age and the apprehension of the witnesses cannot be the grounds for not viewing this case of first-time offenders liberally. The reformative theory advocates acceptability and integration of reformed convicts in order for them to "repent their past and look forward to a bright future", the Court said..In the instant case, the government orders on premature release in the State of UP provided for a three-factor evaluation of cases for allowing the same. This included consideration of criminal antecedents, conduct during serving term, and likelihood to abstain from committing crimes. These factors, the Court said, appeared to have been completely overlooked in the instant case and the refusal to give premature release was "vague, cursory, and merely unsubstantiated opinions of state authorities" without being based on facts and evidence.."It would be gainsaid that length of the sentence or the gravity of the original crime can’t be the sole basis for refusing premature release. Any assessment regarding predilection to commit crime upon release must be based on antecedents as well as conduct of the prisoner while in jail, and not merely on his age or apprehensions of the victims and witnesses.".As such, the Court directed for the convicts to be released on probation within a period of two weeks whilst holding that the authorities may impose appropriate conditions. It is also clarified that the order is not irreversible and may be recalled in case there is a breach of any condition or any misconduct on the part of the convicts..Read Judgment: