D/L Item No. 05 21.09.2026 KOLE 266462 WPA 25118 of 2025 Bhabani Kumar -Vs.- The State of West Bengal & Ors. Mr. Samarjit Balial, … for the petitioner. Mr. Madhu Jana, Mr. R. Agarwala, … for the State. The petitioner is represented. The State respondents are also represented. I have heard the learned Advocates for the parties and considered the materials on record. Learned Advocate for the State has handed over a report dated September 14, 2026 prepared by the Officer-in-Charge, Law Cell, Directorate of Correctional Services, West Bengal. Let the same be kept with the records. A copy of the same has been handed over to the learned Advocate representing the petitioner. Learned Advocate representing the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a life convict who is undergoing life imprisonment at Medinipur Central Correctional Home in connection with offences committed by him under Sections 302 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code. It is further submitted that it will appear from the records of the case that the petitioner has already undergone almost 16 years of actual imprisonment as on date. 2 Learned State Advocate submits that the petitioner’s premature release proposal was last placed before the State Sentence Review Board (‘SSRB’) in its 75th meeting held on December 11, 2025 and the Board had duly considered the proposal and recommended his premature release. It is further submitted that subsequently, the proceedings of the 75th SSRB meeting were duly forwarded to the Judicial Department, Government of West Bengal vide a letter dated February 20, 2026 written by the Directorate of Correctional Services for necessary onward action. Learned Advocate for the State submits that currently, further instructions/orders are awaited in respect of the petitioner from the Judicial Side. Since the petitioner has completed 14 years of actual imprisonment, this Court finds that he has a statutory right for consideration of his case for remission under Section 432 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Section 473 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023) read with the relevant rules of the West Bengal Jail Code relating to remission. It is quite surprising that despite the SSRB having recommended the petitioner’s premature release about nine months ago, the petitioner is still languishing in custody. Although the power of remission is primarily an executive function, this Court is of the view that the said authorities cannot keep the matter pending indefinitely. Any delay in consideration of the petitioner’s case for remission would amount to a denial of such valuable right guaranteed to him under law. 3 Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of by directing the competent authorities/respondent authorities/Judicial Department, Government of West Bengal to issue necessary instructions/orders with respect to the recommendation issued by the SSRB for the petitioner’s premature release. Such instructions/orders must be issued in accordance with law within a period of six weeks from date. The petitioner’s Advocate must be informed of the aforesaid instructions/orders forthwith. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the claim for remission. The authorities shall act independently and in accordance with law without being influenced by any observation made in this order. Since no affidavits are called for, the allegations made in the writ petition are deemed not to be admitted by the respondents. Accordingly, this writ petition stands disposed of. All parties shall act on the server copy of this order, duly downloaded from the official website of this Court Urgent certified photocopy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties upon compliance of necessary formalities. (Rishad Medora, J.)