Overzealous State wants to free convicts

For inexplicable reasons, the Karnataka government is pushing hard to release 99 “reformed” convicted criminals even before they have completed their sentences.

The proposal does not even carry the opinions of criminal psychologists who are better placed to conclude whether convicts could be given their freedom based on their assessments of the jailbirds.

Among the convicts are a man who butchered a six-year-old in the belief that he practised black magic. Another is a man who killed his wife in the presence of his children. A third man killed a boy and dumped the body in a tank. They are among the 99 “reformed” convicts the State Government has recommended to the governor so that he gives his assent to their premature release.

Governor H R Bhardwaj, himself a lawyer, has virtually said “no” to the government’s proposal, especially when one of the prisoners is absconding after getting parole and another who is dead.

Clearly, there is something awfully wrong with the list. According to Prisons Minister A Narayanaswamy, the governor has consented to release one convict, rejected 23, sought clarification in 45 cases, and hinted that 14 cases could be considered by the government itself for release under CrPC 432 (5).  But there are guidelines, and the government can exercise this authority provided it frames rules which it has to adopt to free convicts premature. 

But it seems that the jail authorities have not been able to “reform” many women convicts. Of the 99 lifers whose names have been recommended for premature release recently, just two are women. Records reveal that till December 2011, there were 3,853 men convicts in the State. And women convicts number 180 .

In the Legislative Assembly last week, the minister emphatically stated that he’s helpless to release the convicts though all of them have completed 14 years in jail. But the governor  may have sensed a lacuna in the recommendation, so hasn’t given his consent as yet.

While submitting the details of each convict’s case to the governor, hardly any mandated inputs were furnished. Even the basics like compelling reasons or mitigating circumstances for the release have not been explained. To top it all, none of the files had clemency seeking petition by the convict. In all these cases, the demand is uniform—premature release and not pardon—and all the names have been cleared by the Advisory Committee of the Central Prison.

In its eagerness to release these convicts, the Home Department, under which prisons function, has even overlooked police officers’ opinion. For instance, Babu — convict number 14407, who is in the Gulbarga prison—had killed a six-year-old boy and disposed of the body in a tank after putting it inside a gunny bag. Enmity between the convict and the deceased’s family led to the crime. 

Despite a written opinion from the jurisdictional superintendent of police to the Home Department, which states that Babu, should not be released prematurely, the government is still in favour of releasing him on grounds of being ‘reformed’ and somebody, who has completed 14 years of imprisonment. According to official records, 32-year-old Babu is in good health.

Similar is the case of convict Eliyas Shariff (15923) who is lodged in the Mysore prison. The 42-year-old killed his wife in presence of their children. The government states that he, too, has spent 14 years in prison. The Mysore City police commissioner has clearly opined that Shariff should not be released. The officer’s local enquiry has revealed if the convict is released prematurely, then he’s likely to take revenge against the people who complained against him.

Another interesting case, which shows the government has not applied its mind, is that of Dasappa (7467), son of Thimmaiah. He was lodged in the Bangalore Central Jail. He was released on parole for a short duration on June 10, 2011. Till today, he’s absconding as per the official records. But even his name has been recommended for premature release based on his “good conduct.”  The case was recommended on October 10, 2011.

Convict Vasudeva (12473), who was in the Bangalore jail, died of illness on August 1, 2011. The file submitted to the governor requesting him to release Vasudeva, shows the date as September 14. 

Moreover, the file was not accompanied with any medical records to show his ill-health.

  Minister Narayaswamy has been crying hoarse that, even on humanitarian grounds, his department is unable to set free some convicts, thanks to the governor. But going by the files pertaining to the convicts who have been fortunate enough to figure in the list of those who deserve to be released prematurely, the oldest is 62-year-old Arumugam. He has absolutely no ailments, as per the records of the jail authorities.

The average age of convicts who figure in the list is between 35 and 45. And, not even one convict is terminally ill or has any major ailment. Going by the jail authorities’ records, every convict’s health is “satisfactory.” Further, there’s no report which explains as to how a lifer has transformed her/himself into a reformed person so that s/he can join civil society.

The urgency to release the select convicts began in mid-2009. The Home Department had requested the governor to release 84 life convicts. The then additional advocate general had opined that the Karnataka High Court had struck down rules and guidelines framed by the government pertaining to release of prisoners. In the absence of guidelines, it would not be proper to put up a proposal before the governor for premature release of convicts, was the legal opinion. Hence, the file was referred to the government for a detailed examination.

In October 2009, and February and July 2010, the government re-submitted the files requesting the release of 594 lifers despite not framing the required guidelines to be followed. In September 2011, again a proposal to release 99 convicts were sent to the governor without giving all the required inputs as laid by the Supreme Court while handling the Maru Ram, Narayana Datt and the Epuru Sudhakar cases.

As per the SC direction, six documents should accompany the dossier to be submitted to the governor by the government. The effect of the decision to grant pardon on the family of the victims and society as a whole must be explained. The HC, while adjudicating a criminal appeal of 2003, had observed that only in exceptional cases for public welfare that the prerogative power of the governor should be exercised to release a prisoner prematurely.