The Delhi High Court noted that during his incarceration from 2006 to 2023, the petitioner undertook several responsibilities, including welding work, langar duties. (AI-generated image)The Delhi High Court has ordered the immediate premature release of a life convict who spent over 22 years in prison, scathingly observing that the individual had become “invisible” to the mechanical and “undemocratic” functioning of the government.Justice Neena Bansal Krishna slammed the sentence review board (SRB) for repeatedly rejecting the man’s remission pleas between 2016 and 2024, labelling their decision-making process a “copy-paste” formality.The high court on April 6 was hearing the plea of the man who was awarded a life sentence for sexually assaulting a three and half year old girl in 2003.“The way the SRB meetings are being held reflects a total disregard..to the factors relevant for consideration of the remission..an indifference to the inmate who, for the authority, is nothing but one name in the multitude of cases considered in a meeting.. The man, the life and his existence as a human being, remains totally invisible, in this undemocratic functioning of govt machinery,” the order read. Justice Neena Bansal Krishna took note of the petitioner’s yoga training certificate and observed that his overall jail conduct remained satisfactory throughout.Good conduct and reformation The Delhi High Court noted that during his incarceration from 2006 to 2023, the petitioner undertook several responsibilities, including welding work, langar duties, yoga training, cleaning work, tea service, and managing the prison canteen.It was further highlighted that during his emergency parole in the COVID-19 period, the petitioner was gainfully employed as an e-rickshaw driver before surrendering in April 2023, reflecting his willingness to reintegrate into society.Story continues below this adThe court also took note of his yoga training certificate (April–June 2018) and observed that his overall jail conduct remained satisfactory throughout.Further, the Delhi High Court considered his socio-economic background, noting that his parents are deceased and one of his four brothers is mentally disabled, indicating his family responsibilities.Case’s observation The high court noted that the petitioner has undergone 22 years, five months, ten days of actual incarceration and over 28 years, eight months, 28 days, including remission. The court found that the petitioner had demonstrated complete reformation and loss of propensity to commit crime in this period. The court said that denying him consistently the benefit of remission directly impacts his right to life and personal liberty under Article 21.The high court pointed out that, balancing the individual and societal welfare, it is a fit case where the petitioner is held entitled to remission and is directed to be released.The Delhi High Court pointed out that the authority concerned has time and again failed to give due weight to the petitioner’s exemplary conduct while in incarceration. His participation in rehabilitation/training programs, certificates of recognition as awarded to him, and his contributions to prison activities have been consistently overlooked, Justice Krishna added.The fact that the petitioner had been working in a semi-open jail in 2019, before his release on emergency parole during the COVID-19 pandemic and that he is presently also working in a semi-open jail, demonstrates both trust and reformative progress, a factor which should have weighed in his favour, for his premature release.The court pointed out that the exemplary conduct of the petitioner, in jail, is evidenced through recommendations for pre-mature release by the chief probation officer and social welfare department, on multiple occasions.SRB’s approach criticisedComing down heavily on the sentence review board (SRB), the high court found that their orders are almost copy-paste and have been passed more as a formality, rather than following the principles of natural justice. The high court observed that in all the SRB Meetings, more than 100 cases have been considered and decided. “It is difficult to comprehend how such a number of cases can be considered in one meeting, in a meaningful manner,” the court added. Story continues below this adThe high court also pointed out that the way the SRB meetings are being held reflects a total disregard for the factors relevant to the consideration of the remission.Also Read | US-born child’s ‘deep roots’ in India outweigh American court orders, Delhi High Court rules in bitter custody battleCase backgroundThe high court noted that the petitioner was arrested on January 21, 2003 on the allegation of allegedly sexually assaulting a three and half-year old child, in January, 2003. Subsequently, the trial court convicted him under Section 376 IPC (rape) in December 2025 and sentenced him to undergo life imprisonment and also imposed a fine. Aggrieved by the same, he filed an appeal, but the same was dismissed by this court in January 2010, and the order of conviction and sentence was upheld. Story continues below this adThe petitioner also mentioned that no special leave petition has been preferred in his knowledge before the Supreme Court, and therefore, the order of conviction and sentence attained finality.Also Read | 15-year wait ends: Delhi High Court orders DTC to appoint 46-year-old driverThe case of the petitioner for premature release was considered for the first time by the special review board in January 2016, but the same was rejected based on the nature and gravity of the offence and the threat to the family of the victim, despite the recommendation of the chief probation officer. This was followed by nine more rejections by the authorities based on the gravity of the offence, minor age of the child, opposition of police authorities and the larger interest of the society. His tenth rejection concerning the premature release was in September 2024. Richa Sahay is a Legal Correspondent for The Indian Express, where she focuses on simplifying the complexities of the Indian judicial system. A law postgraduate, she leverages her advanced legal education to bridge the gap between technical court rulings and public understanding, ensuring that readers stay informed about the rapidly evolving legal landscape. Expertise Advanced Legal Education: As a law postgraduate, Richa possesses the academic depth required to interpret intricate statutes and constitutional nuances. Her background allows her to provide more than just summaries; she offers context-driven analysis of how legal changes impact the average citizen. Specialized Beat: She operates at the intersection of law and public policy, focusing on: Judicial Updates: Providing timely reports on orders from the Supreme Court of India and various High Courts. Legal Simplification: Translating dense "legalese" into accessible, engaging narratives without sacrificing factual accuracy. Legislative Changes: Monitoring new bills, amendments, and regulatory shifts that shape Indian society. ... Read More © IE Online Media Services Pvt LtdTags:delhi high court