UPSC Mains Practice Questions: "The remission of punishment must balance justice and reform. In light of recent Supreme Court rulings, examine the legal and ethical boundaries of executive power in granting remissions."
Answer:
The remission of punishment is an important tool in criminal justice that seeks to balance the goals of reformation and justice. It reflects the rehabilitative purpose of punishment, allowing convicts an opportunity for reintegration into society. However, recent rulings by the Supreme Court, especially in the Bilkis Bano case, have highlighted the legal and ethical boundaries of this executive power.
Legally, remission must comply with Section 432 of the CrPC and be exercised by the appropriate government, i.e., the one where the trial occurred. In Bilkis Bano, the Court held that the Gujarat government lacked jurisdiction to grant remission, since the trial was conducted in Maharashtra. Thus, the remission was invalidated, reinforcing the principle of federal competence and the importance of due process.
Ethically, the remission process must uphold public conscience, victim rights, and constitutional morality. Arbitrary remission in heinous crimes—such as gangrape and murder—undermines the justice system and erodes public trust. The SC emphasized that remission should not be influenced by political or extraneous considerations, especially in cases involving crimes against women or communal violence.
In conclusion, while remission is a valuable reformative tool, it must be exercised with transparency, legal validity, and moral responsibility. The judiciary’s scrutiny acts as a necessary check to ensure that executive discretion does not override the interests of justice.
#UPSCMainsPracticeQuestion