• News
  • India News
  • A convict can't be deprived of right to live with dignity, says HC
This story is from January 15, 2024

A convict can't be deprived of right to live with dignity, says HC

A person cannot be deprived of the right to live with dignity merely because that person is convicted, said Calcutta high court in a case where a woman’s request for premature release of her husband — serving a life sentence — was dismissed by the West Bengal State Sentence Review Board, reports Aheli Banerjee. Ordering the Board to reconsider the woman’s request, Justice Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya said the petitioner’s husband has already spent a considerable period behind bars and there cannot be a double punishment by refusing to reintegrate him into mainstream society.
A convict can't be deprived of right to live with dignity, says HC
KOLKATA: A person cannot be deprived of the right to live with dignity merely because that person is convicted, said Calcutta high court in a case where a woman’s request for premature release of her husband — serving a life sentence — was dismissed by the West Bengal State Sentence Review Board, reports Aheli Banerjee.
Ordering the Board to reconsider the woman’s request, Justice Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya said the petitioner’s husband has already spent a considerable period behind bars and there cannot be a double punishment by refusing to reintegrate him into mainstream society.
1x1 polls

The petitioner’s counsel argued that her husband has been in custody for the last 20 years and the Supreme Court has categorically observed that the ultimate goal of imprisonment, even in the most serious crime, is reformative if the offender undergoes a sufficiently long spell of punishment through imprisonment. Taking the argument, the court observed that “it is well-settled that the aim of punishment in modern criminal jurisprudence is reformative and not retributive”.
The court found that the considerations listed in a response to the wife’s RTI application were not grounds for rejection in the present case. It was found that no conduct report was taken from the superintendent of the correctional home where the convict was incarcerated to show a difference in past and current behaviour. There was no record to show that the convict acquired any further education, qualifications or engaged in socially productive work in the meantime.
End of Article
FOLLOW US ON SOCIAL MEDIA