The Allahabad High Court has ruled that the governor’s authority to grant premature release under Article 161 of the Constitution is a sovereign executive power. However, this power must not be exercised arbitrarily; it is subject to the governing rules and remission policy in place.
Court Overturns Denial of Premature Release
A recent court ruling identified a significant error in the decision to deny premature release for a petitioner. The court found that the initial ruling inaccurately documented the duration of incarceration that the petitioner had already served. This error was deemed apparent on the face of the record, leading to the court’s decision to overturn the previous denial.
The jail report recorded that he had served a prison term of four years, six months and six days without remission and five years and four months with remission, against the seven-year sentence. His conduct was recorded as satisfactory. It was also contended that the order did not disclose any adverse material against him and failed to consider his satisfactory conduct in jail.
Petitioner Ram Pratap Singh was convicted in an attempt-to-murder case by the additional sessions judge of Fatehpur district in Uttar Pradesh in 2002 and sentenced to seven years’ rigorous imprisonment. His criminal appeal before the high court was dismissed in 2019 and thereafter, the Supreme Court also dismissed his special leave petition (SLP). In September 2022, a proposal for his premature release was sent to the jail authorities and the Fatehpur district magistrate, but it remained pending. The petitioner later made an application in February 2025, seeking a decision on the proposal, wherein he pointed out that he had served more than half of his sentence.
The petitioner’s counsel argued before the high court that the decision had ignored the jail report and wrongly calculated his period of incarceration.
