The Allahabad High Court has ruled that the Governor’s power under Article 161 of the Constitution to grant remission cannot be exercised arbitrarily, while quashing an order that rejected a convict’s premature release plea after authorities wrongly calculated the period of imprisonment he had already undergone.
A Division Bench of Justice J.J. Munir and Justice Tarun Saxena found that the rejection order incorrectly recorded the petitioner’s custody period as only 2 years and 6 days without remission, despite the jail report showing that he had actually undergone 4 years, 6 months and 6 days without remission. The Court held that such an apparent error could not form the basis for denying consideration of premature release.
Background of the Case
Ram Pratap Singh had challenged the decision communicated on June 26, 2025, by which his request for premature release was rejected. He had been sentenced to seven years’ rigorous imprisonment in 2002 and his conviction was subsequently upheld by the Allahabad High Court and the Supreme Court.
According to the jail report dated February 23, 2025, Singh had completed 4 years, 6 months and 6 days of imprisonment without remission, and 5 years and 4 months after adding remission. His conduct was recorded as satisfactory.
However, the rejection order stated that he had undergone only 2 years and 6 days without remission.
Court's Observation
The Bench found the discrepancy significant. Under sub-Rule (iii) of Rule 4 of the Uttar Pradesh Prisoners’ Release on Probation Rules, 1938, a convict in the relevant category becomes eligible for consideration after serving one-third of the sentence without remission.
The Court noted that Singh had already served more than half of his seven-year sentence without remission. It observed that the rejection order contained an “error apparent on the face of record” and reflected non-application of mind to the jail records.
The Bench further remarked that the Governor’s power under Article 161, though a constitutional and sovereign executive power, “cannot be exercised arbitrarily.” The Court also noted that the order relied upon the non-recommendation of the District Magistrate and Superintendent of Police without setting out the reasons contained in their reports.
Decision
The Allahabad High Court allowed the writ petition and quashed the June 26, 2025 order rejecting the premature release plea.
The matter was remitted to the Government for fresh consideration, with a direction to decide it within one month from receipt of the Court's order.
Case Details
Case Title: Ram Pratap Singh v. State of U.P. and Others
Case Number: Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No. 17372 of 2025
Judges: Justice J.J. Munir and Justice Tarun Saxena
Decision Date: August 10, 2026
