Skip to main content

Remission, Commutation And Suspension Of Sentence

 Remission, Commutation And Suspension Of Sentence

To commute a sentence means to shorten it in duration without altering the substance of the sentence. In criminal law, commutation refers to the reduction or substitution of a sentence with a less harsh one (for example, a death sentence for life imprisonment). Suspension is defined as the temporary withdrawal of a sentence, often known as the temporary delay of a punishment.

Remission and suspension of a sentence are two different things.

Section 432 of the Code of Criminal Procedure Code of 1973 stipulates that the judge has the authority to suspend or remit a sentence.

Remission differs significantly from suspension in that suspension indicates that the punishment will be postponed for a brief amount of time, but in remission the nature of the penalty will stay the same, but the time duration will be decreased.

A sentence that has been given by the relevant government can be commuted under the provisions of Section 432 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. In addition, the head of state has the authority to award remission to convicts upon their request, and there is also universal remission for a certain group of prisoners, which is granted with the assistance and advice of council ministers only on extraordinary occasions, according to the law.

For example, if A murders B and is sentenced to 30 years in jail, but his term is lowered to 15 years, this is referred to as remission of a sentence.

If, on the other hand, the condition of remission is not met, the remission will be revoked, and the offender will be required to serve the remainder of his original sentence. Aiming towards prisoner reformation, remission is intended to guarantee that a prisoner maintains positive relationships and behaviour with his or her fellow inmates, as well as to aid in the improvement of the prison's work culture. Remission Is typically awarded on the basis on the prisoner's behaviour while incarcerated, his assistance in the prison's work, and other factors.

On the contrary, suspension is dealt with under Chapter 32 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, which was published in 1973. It is the postponing of a court order (judgement) for a short length of time or for an unlimited amount of time in specific circumstances.

Suspension can be conditional or unconditional; unconditional suspension indicates that there are no restrictions linked to the suspension, whereas conditional suspended sentences entail that the offender must satisfy specific requirements prior to or concurrently with his or her suspension.

If A has been convicted of murder and sentenced to 20 years in prison, he has been granted unconditional suspension, which means he is free to do whatever he wants. However, if he has been granted conditional suspension with a condition that he must remain crime-free for the next 18 months, the judge may re-impose his suspended sentence on him if he violates his conditional suspension.

Even after it has suspended the imposition of a sentence, the court has the authority to remove the suspension and impose any punishment that is available at the moment of conviction, regardless of whether the sentence has been suspended. A court can conduct a review of the case and determine whether or not to revoke the suspension, as well as what punishment to apply if the suspension is reversed.

Changing the meaning of a statement

Commutation refers to the process of modifying the type of punishment; in most cases, it refers to the lowering of penalty from a severe punishment to a more severe punishment.

For example, if a person has been sentenced to death, the punishment may be commuted to life imprisonment. The commuting of a sentence is not subject to any restrictions. In accordance with Section 433 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the responsible government has the authority to commute a sentence in proper circumstances. Some sentences are under the purview of commutation, mercy pleas, and death sentences, which is generally referred to as one of them.

The primary source of contention around the commutation is that it highlights the question of the offender's human rights as well as the impact on society as a result of the serious offence. In compliance with the Code of Criminal Procedure, the majority of death sentences are commuted to 14 years of life imprisonment. Additionally, Section 434 of the Criminal Procedure Code provides that in cases of death sentences, the rights of the states government under Sections 432 and 433 of the Criminal Procedure Code might be utilised by the federal government as well.

 In the case of the Rajiv Gandhi assassination, the Supreme Court modified the death sentence of the suspects to life imprisonment. As a result, the Tamil government suggested that the death sentences of all seven inmates be commuted, and this motion was contested before the Supreme Court, which said that. According to the Supreme Court, life imprisonment could only entail incarceration for the remainder of the convict's life, not for a period of time. The right to claim commutation, remission, or other relief as provided by Article 72 or Article 161 of the Indian Constitution would always remain in effect, regardless of the circumstances. The authority granted to the executive by our constitution is outside the scope of the judicial power of the courts, and as a result, the courts are unable to intervene in the affairs of the administration. Furthermore, a special category of sentence was established, which was either life imprisonment or imprisonment for a term of not more than 14 years, provided that the sentence was not commuted or that the high court or the supreme court ruled that the death penalty should be substituted for life imprisonment or imprisonment.The president has reduced more than 20 death sentences to life imprisonment over the course of the previous ten years with the assistance and suggestion of the minister of home affairs.
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Section 58B of The Advocates Act - Special provision relating to certain disciplinary proceedings

 Section 58B The Advocates Act Description (1) As from the 1st day of September, 1963, every proceeding in respect of any disciplinary matter in relation to an existing advocate of a High Court shall, save as provided in the first proviso to sub-section (2), be disposed of by the State Bar Council in relation to that High Court, as if the existing advocate had been enrolled as an advocate on its roll. (2) If immediately before the said date, there is any proceeding in respect of any disciplinary matter in relation to an existing advocate pending before any High Court under the Indian Bar Councils Act, 1926 (38 of 1926), such proceeding shall stand transferred to the State Bar Council in relation to that High Court, as if it were a proceeding pending before the corresponding Bar Council under clause (c) of sub-section (1) of section 56: Provided that where in respect of any such proceeding the High Court has received the finding of a Tribunal constituted under section 11 of the Indian B
Post a Comment
Read more

Case Laws related to Defamation in favour of ClaimantCase Laws related to Defamation in favour of Claimant. TOLLEY Vs, J.S FRY & SONS LTD – (1931) Facts The defendants were owners of chocolate manufacturing company. They advertised their products with a caricature of the claimant, who was a prominent amateur golfer, showing him with the defendants’ chocolate in his pocket while playing golf. The advertisement compared the excellence of the chocolate to the excellence of the claimant’s drive. The claimant did not consent to or knew about the advertisement. Issue The claimant alleged that the advertisement suggested that he agreed to his portrait being used for commercial purposes and for financial gain. He further claimed that the use of his image made him look like someone who prostituted his reputation for advertising purposes and was thus unworthy of his status. At trial, several golfers gave evidence to the effect that if an amateur sold himself for advertisement, he no longer maintained his amateur status and might be asked to resign from his respective club. Furthermore, there was evidence that the possible adverse effects of the caricature on the claimant’s reputation were brought to the defendants’ attention. The trial judge found that the caricature could have a defamatory meaning. The jury then found in favor of the claimant. Held The House of Lords held that in the circumstances of this case – as explained by the facts – the caricature was capable of constituting defamation. In other words, the publication could have the meaning alleged by the claimant. The Lords also ordered a new trial limited to the assessment of damages. NEWSTEAD V LANDON EXPRESS NEWSPAPER LTD, (1939) Facts: A newspaper published a defamatory article about Harold Newstead. However, another person with this name brought an action in libel. He claimed that the article had been misunderstood as leading to him. The defendant newspaper recognised that they published the article. Also, they denied that they had the intention of being defamatory of him. Consequently, the claimant argued that the newspaper was under a duty. The duty was to give a clear and complete description of the correct person. Moreover, the claimant argued that the defendants were in breach of the duty. Issues: The issue in Newstead v London Express Newspaper, was if the reasonable persons would have understood the words complained of to refer to the plaintiff. Held: The Court of Appeal stated that in accordance with the current law on libel, liability for libel does not depend on the intention of the defamer; but on the fact of the defamation. Accordingly, a reasonable man, in this case a newspaper publisher, must be aware of the possibility of individuals with the same name and must assume that the words published will be read by a reasonable man with reasonable care.

  Case Laws related to Defamation in favour of Claimant.  TOLLEY  Vs,  J.S FRY & SONS LTD – (1931) Facts The defendants were owners of chocolate manufacturing company. They advertised their products with a caricature of the claimant, who was a prominent amateur golfer, showing him with the defendants’ chocolate in his pocket while playing golf. The advertisement compared the excellence of the chocolate to the excellence of the claimant’s drive. The claimant did not consent to or knew about the advertisement.   Issue The claimant alleged that the advertisement suggested that he agreed to his portrait being used for commercial purposes and for financial gain. He further claimed that the use of his image made him look like someone who prostituted his reputation for advertising purposes and was thus unworthy of his status. At trial, several golfers gave evidence to the effect that if an amateur sold himself for advertisement, he no longer maintained his amateur status and might be aske
1 comment
Read more

Rules as to delivery of goods

                             Rules as to delivery of goods Section 2(2) of Sale of Goods Act defines ‘delivery’ as a ‘voluntary transfer of possession from one person to another.’ Thus, if the transfer of goods is not voluntary and is taken by theft, by fraud, or by force, then there is no ‘delivery. Moreover, the ‘delivery’ should have the effect of putting the goods in possession of the buyer. The essence of the delivery is a voluntary transfer of possession of goods from one person to another. There is no delivery of goods where they are obtained at pistol point or theft. 1. Mode of Delivery: According to Section 33, delivery of goods sold may be made by doing anything which the parties agree shall be treated as delivery or which has the effect of putting the goods in the possession of the buyer or of any person authorized to hold them on his behalf. Delivery of goods may be actual, symbolic or constructive. 2. Expenses of Delivery: According to Section 36(5), unless otherwise agree
Post a Comment
Read more