Premature release of prisoners: Delhi HC suggests reconstitution of Sentence Review Board, fine-tuning 2004 policy
Justice Girish Kathpalia was dealing with a plea by a convict, who was serving life imprisonment for murder committed in 2001. He was seeking premature release after spending more than 21 years in prison with remission.
The convict's case for premature release had been rejected by the SRB five times between 2020 and 2023, compelling him to then seek a direction from the Delhi High Court. On Wednesday, the Delhi High Court directed the SRB to consider his case afresh. It further directed the SRB, that in case it does not find it to be a fit case to grant premature release to the convict, 'the decision of SRB shall be worded in a manner that one can decipher as to what worked in the mind of SRB'.
Holding that the SRB's decision of denial of premature release to the convict 'suffers from vices of non-application of mind and completely mechanical approach to such a sensitive issue', Justice Kathpalia noted, 'The composition of the SRB would make this court assume that each matter is discussed threadbare in such meetings. But unfortunately, the manner in which minutes of these meetings were worded, the allegation of non-application of mind cannot be brushed aside.'
'Every instrumentality of the State, be it judicial or administrative, while deciding an issue must author the decision in such manner that deciphers what worked in the mind of the authority concerned. The court must have material before it to examine as to whether there was proper application of mind or not. In the present case, there is nothing on record to suggest proper application of mind by the SRB,' he added.
Placing faith in the convict's reformation, the court observed, 'I have no doubt that the petitioner stands substantially reformed and can become a useful member of the society. Keeping the petitioner in jail for further period would not yield any fruitful result towards his reformation or to the society at large.'
Making a case for applying the reformatory tool of premature release or remission, the court recorded, 'Not that due to passage of time, the inherent perversity of the crime per se diminishes in any manner. But for the purposes of reformative sentencing, such long incarceration, as already suffered by the petitioner, the perversity must be visualised as faded. The wound suffered by the kith and kin of the deceased, which was fresh in the year 2001, would have by now reduced to scab.'
'Time heals all wounds. This is the only way to fathom in order to ensure purposive application of the reformatory tool of premature release, otherwise no convict would be ever granted an opportunity to reform himself. For, life imprisonment, by its very nature is awarded in gruesome offences where the appropriate punishment is a bit short of awarding capital sentence. A punishment, to be scientific has to have an end somewhere during lifetime of the convict,' Justice Kathpalia said.
While the state had opposed the convict's plea, referring to his misconduct in 2015 when he had jumped parole and his re-arrest in two more criminal cases, the court did not concur with the state's view.
'…citing this misconduct, the SRB has repeatedly denied premature release to the petitioner. Some point of time has to be there, when aftereffects of such misconduct must taper down. It has been more than a decade since the petitioner jumped parole and got involved in those two cases. After the year 2015, there is not even a whiff of any allegation of any jail misconduct on the part of the petitioner. Rather, as observed hereafter, subsequently the petitioner was awarded a number of commendations by the jail authorities. Most significantly, as discussed above, the petitioner stands acquitted in those two cases,' the court reasoned.
The convict was issued six commendation certificates while in jail, which included appreciation for his work and performance on Republic Days, and his work in assisting jail administration in fighting COVID-19.
Taking the commendation certificates into account, the court noted, '…the petitioner had done an extraordinary job in the jail in fight against Corona, due to which the jail administration succeeded in keeping Corona free the jail no.2, even while admitting and quarantining more than 8,200 newly admitted prisoners. These certificates, coupled with the fact that across a period of time, the petitioner was released on parole and furlough more than once show a substantial reformative growth of the petitioner, which is a vital indicator of reduced propensity to commit crime again.'
'As regards possibility of the petitioner committing crime again, merely because he has not physically attained old age, it cannot be said that there are higher chances of his committing crime again. Bodily strength has no
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hindu
5 hours ago
- The Hindu
Tihar Jail, India's largest prison, under scanner for ‘extortion racket'
Long infamous for chronic overcrowding, India's largest and most high-security prison, Tihar Jail, is now under the scanner for an 'extortion racket' running within its four walls, allegedly involving officials and inmates. On August 11, the Delhi High Court, acting on a petition filed by a former inmate, directed the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) to register an FIR and investigate what it described as 'very disturbing and startling' allegations. The case stems from a petition filed by businessman Mohit Kumar Goyal, who was lodged in Tihar Jail between June 4 and August 6, 2024, in connection with a cheating case before being granted bail. In his plea, Mr. Goyal alleged that during his two-month incarceration he was repeatedly coerced into paying 'protection money' by prison officials in collusion with certain inmates. The former inmate told the court about a senior official warning him that refusal to pay up would invite dire consequences. Mr. Goyal alleged that the threats included being grievously harmed or having his face disfigured with a blade. He alleged that certain officials introduced him to inmates, who acted as their operatives. In the petition, filed through advocate Sachin, the businessman said he was forced to pay nearly ₹15 lakh as extortion money. The modus operandi to extort money from the inmates is to have their family members transfer a fixed sum of money to the relatives of the other inmates who are part of the alleged racket, Mr. Goyal told the court. In return, the inmates are allowed unlimited use of videoconferencing facilities for 'eMulakat', online interviews with family members and legal representatives, as well as access to phones. An inmate who refused to pay up, the businessman claimed, exposed himself to harsh punitive measures and threats of bodily harm. Court-ordered probe Considering the seriousness of the allegations, the court on September 26 last year directed the Inspecting Judge of Tihar Jail to examine the allegations and submit a report. On May 2, the court perused the report, which was filed in a sealed cover. A Bench of Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela noted that 'very disturbing and startling facts have been revealed pointing not only to certain irregularities and illegalities in the functioning of Tihar Jail but also to issues touching upon even criminal activities going on there'. The report was based on a detailed inquiry conducted by the Inspecting Judge on examining the inmates, the prison authorities, and other individuals whose names were disclosed by the petitioner. The report also analysed the call detail records to examine calls made by inmates to people outside. It purportedly also highlighted 'how the official landline number in the jail was misused by vested interests for promoting nefarious activities'. While the report also questioned the conduct of the petitioner, it confirmed the existence of an extortion network operating in connivance with jail authorities. The court directed a two-pronged action — a preliminary probe by the CBI and an administrative inquiry by the Delhi government's Principal Secretary (Home), to identify officers responsible for the lapses. Upon examining the CBI's preliminary inquiry report, the High Court noted that the findings 'reflected various malpractices prevalent in jails' and indicated collusion between inmates and officials in corrupt activities. Meanwhile, in compliance with the court's earlier orders, the Delhi government informed the Bench that disciplinary proceedings had been initiated against nine jail officials. Some of them have been suspended and others transferred, with further action being pursued under the Central Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1965, the government told the court.
Indian Express
7 hours ago
- Indian Express
Denial of admission to private unaided school not a violation of right to education: Karnataka High Court
The Karnataka High Court recently ruled that denial of admission to a private unaided school will not violate the right to education under the Constitution. Article 21A of the Constitution, introduced by the 86th Amendment in 2002, guarantees free and compulsory education for children aged 6 to 14 years. In this case, the petitioner approached the high court seeking an order to admit his son to St Paul's High School in Belagavi as a lower kindergarten student. He said they had received a communication stating that his son had been selected for admission as a student, and they would have to come to meet the principal on February 28. The website then changed the status to 'verification pending'. The school later informed the petitioner that the confirmation of admission had been erroneously sent to him along with 61 other students owing to a software issue and that the sanctioned number of students, 150, had already been admitted. The petitioner argued that the child ought to be admitted owing to the initial communication. The school's counsel argued that the petition could not be maintained since it was a private, unaided institution. The petitioner's counsel, on the other hand, relied on a prior Delhi High Court judgment to argue that, since education is a matter with public scope, the court's jurisdiction did extend to it. The order, passed on August 5 by a bench of Justice Suraj Govindaraj, stated that in the case of fundamental rights being affected, the court's jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution could be applied even if the school was a private entity. However, the court did not agree that said rights had actually been violated in this case. The court noted, 'There is no specific allegation in the petition regarding any discrimination or the like which would violate Article 14 of the Constitution of India, nor is any such allegation made as regards the violation of fundamental rights under Articles 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India, though a reference is made that non-grant of admission would deprive the petitioners of their rights under Article 21 of the Constitution of India, the mere non-admission of petitioner No.2 (the student) in respondent No.3 school would not amount to a violation of Article 21.' The court pointed out that there were many other schools where the child could be admitted. Having made these observations, the court dismissed the petition.
Mint
15 hours ago
- Mint
Delhi High Court's BIG ruling: Merely crying of woman cannot make out case of dowry harassment
The mere fact that a woman was crying cannot make a case of dowry harassment, said the Delhi High Court while dismissing a petition against the discharge of a husband and his family from charges of cruelty and dowry harassment. According to the prosecution, the woman, married in December 2010, faced harassment and dowry demands from her husband and in-laws. Her family claimed that they spent nearly ₹ 4 lakh on the wedding, alleging that later demands for a motorcycle, cash, and a gold bracelet were made by the husband and in-laws. The woman, a mother of two daughters, died on 31 March 2014. 'Statement of the sister of the deceased under Section 161 Cr.P.C. was recorded wherein she also stated that on the occasion of Holi, she had called her sister and found her crying. However, merely because the deceased was crying, cannot per se make out any case of dowry harassment,' Justice Neena Bansal Krishna said. She also observed that the father of the woman neither mentioned specific incidents nor did he provide proof of giving money to the accused. 'Such bald assertions, in the given situation, cannot be held to be even making out a prima facie case of harassment,' the judge added. The trial court had discharged the accused noting that the death took place due to pneumonia, a natural cause. The high court also emphasised that the post-mortem report attributed the cause of death to pneumonia, not cruelty. 'In the present case, to bring in the clause of cruelty leading to the death of the woman, it may be noted that the deceased had died not because of any act of cruelty but for natural reasons... Therefore, Clause (a) to the Explanation annexed to Section 498A IPC is not attracted,' the Court said.
