Looking at the Supreme Court in Kareni.
The convicts are entitled to be considered a remission, even if the punishment is more than 20 years or a specified deadline if the order does not appear that the convict is not entitled to early release or release or release or the like, the Supreme Court in Karnataka said.
The court pointed out that the rule 164 of Karnataka prisons and the handbook of the remedial services, 2021, it is clear that there is no special embargo, that the convicted person is entitled to forgive if he is punished for 20 or more years or even for a certain period of time after 20 years.
Judge Suraj Govindaraj approved the order and at the same time allowed the petition filed by Deep Angadi, who questioned the rejection of an action for the waiver of her husband, sister -in -law and father -in -law, who were sentenced to 21 years in the case of murder in 2013.
In 2008, the Court of Justice in Belagavi imposed a death penalty on Siddapp, husband, SiddalingAppu, Švagr and Mallavva, the father -in -law of the petitioner and the High Court in 2013 amended it to imprison for 21 years.
Their request for remission of the sentence was rejected by the Prison Authorities because the imprisonment is for a certain period of 21 years.
However, the High Court explained that there was no condition that the convicts were not entitled to remission or release.
The court pointed out that the remission system that comes with certain conditions is focused on the reformation of prisoners, and stated that “forgiveness is detained for detention as a carrot to properly behave with discipline and good behavior with the hope of being released soon.”
The High Court, who quoted the order of the Supreme Court, stated that the convicts of convicts were entitled only after 14 years of imprisonment.
The High Court ordered the prison bodies to consider them to be released because their behavior was found to be satisfactory.
Read more
Published – 1 September 2025 20:36
