Priyadarshini Mattoo rape-murder: Consider afresh case for premature release of convict facing life sentence, HC tells Sentence Review Board
Holding the SRB's decision to deny Singh, along with two other prisoners, premature release as suffering from 'material procedural and legal infirmities', the court highlighted several lacunae in the current process undertaken by the board while deciding applications for early release of prisoners.
Justice Sanjeev Narula directed the SRB to convene its next meeting within three months from Tuesday, when the cases of the three petitioners shall be placed for reconsideration 'based on a fresh evaluation of all material and reports,' and a fresh decision shall be rendered within four months.
To ensure adequate deliberation and proper application of mind in each case, the HC directed that the SRB shall take up only as many cases as can be reasonably decided in one meeting, keeping in mind the principles of natural justice reiterated in the present judgment.
Justice Narula also issued a slew of recommendations to better align SRB's processes and ensure informed decision-making for considering the early release of convicts.
Justice Narula recommended that the GNCTD (Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi) and the Department of Prisons 'take expeditious steps to institutionalise the involvement of mental health professionals in the premature release process'. He added that 'a system for psychological assessment of eligible convicts carried out by qualified clinical psychologists or psychiatrists, should be introduced, either by amending the existing framework under the DPR (Delhi Prison Rules) or by issuing appropriate administrative guidelines'.
The order further outlined, '…in appropriate cases, the SRB may also consider calling for independent psychological evaluations, especially where the decision hinges on the convict's likelihood to reoffend. A mere reliance on jail conduct or anecdotal impressions from prison staff does not adequately capture the psychological dimensions of reform and risk.'
It also recommended GNCTD to 'evolve a structured protocol for incorporating victim perspectives in the premature release process', noting that 'a clear procedure should be established to locate, contact, and document the views of victims or their families in a sensitive and time bound manner, ensuring their voices are heard without causing re traumatisation'.
The order suggested the SRB maintain a written record of whether victims' input was received or solicited, and how such input was weighed in the final decision. 'This would enhance transparency, fortify public confidence in the process, and promote a restorative understanding of justice that respects both the rights of convicts and the dignity of victims,' it added.
In four petitions, Singh, along with three other prisoners, had questioned the functioning of the SRB, while seeking directions for their early release.
Singh has already served around 29 years and 11 months in jail with remission and 22 years without remission. Eligible for open jail, he is currently permitted to exit the prison complex daily from 8 am to 8 pm to work as a legal consultant with a real estate company.
Singh, in a 2023 petition, had sought quashing of the recommendation of the SRB rejecting his premature release in a October 21, 2021 meeting. Thereafter, his case was considered in 2024 and again rejected.
Mattoo was raped and murdered in January 1996. Singh, a law student of Delhi University, was acquitted by the trial court in the case on December 3, 1999, but the HC had on October 27, 2006 reversed the decision, holding him guilty of rape and murder and awarded him death penalty. Singh challenged his conviction and death sentence awarded by the HC. In October 2010, the Supreme Court upheld Singh's conviction but commuted the death sentence to life imprisonment.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hindustan Times
an hour ago
- Hindustan Times
Chandigarh metro DPR yet to be filed, Centre tells Lok Sabha
The much-delayed Chandigarh Metro project has once again come under parliamentary scrutiny, with the Union government informing the Lok Sabha that the detailed project report (DPR) is yet to be submitted by the Chandigarh Administration. MP Manish Tewari questioned the government regarding the metro project in Chandigarh. Responding to a series of questions raised by Chandigarh MP Manish Tewari during the ongoing session, the ministry of housing and urban affairs revealed that the Unified Metropolitan Transport Authority (UMTA) — set up for overseeing the metro project — has convened only three meetings in the past 27 months. Tewari sought updates on the number of UMTA meetings held since its formation, the review status of the latest feasibility study conducted by RITES, and whether any joint proposal had been submitted by Punjab, Haryana and the Chandigarh Administration. He also inquired about the timeline for DPR completion and the cost-sharing formula among stakeholders. In its written response, the ministry stated that the UMTA was constituted by the Chandigarh Administration on April 28, 2023. Since then, meetings were held on July 18, 2023, December 13, 2023, and September 2, 2024. The Centre reiterated that urban transport planning falls primarily under the purview of state governments and union territories, with the Centre offering guidance through policy frameworks such as the National Urban Transport Policy (2006), the Metro Rail Policy (2017), and the Transit-Oriented Development Policy (2017). Financial assistance, it added, is extended only upon the receipt of concrete proposals. Tokhan Sahu, minister of state for housing and urban affairs, informed the House that the detailed project report (DPR) for the Chandigarh Metro has not yet been submitted to the central government. Moreover, no details were provided regarding the estimated cost of the project or any financial collaboration model among the stakeholders. At the same time, the tricity's growing traffic woes remain unresolved. In June this year the project received a fresh green signal from Rail India Technical and Economic Services (RITES) in its latest report, where it indicated a positive economic viability. In February this year, however, RITES was told to re-examine its metro ridership estimate of 11.3 lakh passengers per year in a meeting that the then Haryana transport additional chief secretary Ashok Khemka chaired. In April, the Union ministry had also stated in Parliament that no DPR had been received. ₹25,000–30,000 crore price tag likely The cost is likely to decide the fate of the project. Estimates suggest the cost could range between ₹25,000 crore and ₹30,000 crore, depending on the ratio of underground to elevated sections. Phase 1 of the project is expected to be completed by 2032 with construction starting in 2027, provided all approvals are secured. Under this phase, a stretch of 85.65 km has been planned, comprising both overhead and underground routes, with 16.5 km of underground route falling in the heritage sectors.
Hindustan Times
2 hours ago
- Hindustan Times
Centre declines nod to Punjab power minister Harbhajan for US visit
The Union government has denied political clearance to Punjab power minister Harbhajan Singh for his planned visit to the US, sources said on Thursday. Punjab power minister Harbhajan Singh Singh was to participate in the National Conference of State Legislatures (NCSL) Legislative Summit 2025, scheduled to be held in Boston, Massachusetts, from August 4 to 6. Political leaders require clearance from the ministry of external affairs for travelling abroad. Singh has not been given political clearance by the Union government for visiting the US, the sources said. Last year, the Centre denied political clearance to chief minister Bhagwant Mann for his visit to Paris to support the Indian hockey team at the Olympic Games. Punjab assembly speaker Kultar Singh Sandhwan was also denied political clearance for going to participate in a legislature conference in the US in August last year. In 2022, minister Aman Arora was also denied political clearance for a knowledge sharing study tour to Europe. The invitation to Singh was extended jointly by the NCSL and National Legislators' Conference Bharat (NLC Bharat). The NCSL Legislative Summit 2025 is one of the largest gatherings of legislative leaders, staff experts and policymakers worldwide, creating an environment filled with unparalleled learning, networking and inspiration opportunities. The summit would feature open sessions covering various aspects of governance, professional development workshops and networking events designed to facilitate knowledge exchange among legislative colleagues from different countries and jurisdictions, according to an official release issued on July 28.
New Indian Express
2 hours ago
- New Indian Express
Madras High Court tells MEA to reconsider passport application of ‘stateless' 23-year-old
MADURAI: The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court recently came to the rescue of a stateless woman, born to Sri Lankan parents in a refugee camp in Karur, after her passport application was rejected by the Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) without affording her the opportunity of a hearing. Following a petition filed by the woman, S Harinaa, Justice C Saravanan directed the MEA to reconsider the application within three months by obtaining a fresh report from the police. Harinaa was born to two Sri Lankan nationals in a refugee camp at Rayanoor in Karur district in February 2002. Wanting to study abroad, she had earlier moved the HC in 2022, against rejection of her passport application. While disposing of her petition in June 2023, the court had observed that there are provisions under the Passports Act, 1967, which enables the centre to issue passports to even non-citizens, if it feels it would be in public interest. Since Harinaa holds citizenship neither in Sri Lanka nor India, the court also declared her a stateless person. However, her application was once again rejected in May last year, challenging which she moved the court again. The second rejection order was passed based on a police verification report which included wrong information that Harinaa was born in Sri Lanka. The Deputy Solicitor General of India, opposing Harinaa's plea, told the court the MEA feels that issuance of a Certificate of Identity to Harinaa may not be in the interest of the nation. However, Justice Saravanan observed that there are ample numbers of documents, including Harinaa's birth certificate, to show she was born in India, while there are no records to indicate she was born in Sri Lanka and entered India either legally or illegally. Noting that these aspects were not considered by the MEA, the judge gave the above directions.
