December 20,2018:

On Wednesday, Delhi High Court states that,"Human life and personal liberty are valuable" and questioned whether Courts can order premature release of a convict when State is unwilling to do so".

HC Bench comprising of Justice Siddharth Mridul and Justice Sangita Dhingra Sehgal asked Counsel appearing on behalf of Sushil Sharma to address it on this aspect, while hearing a plea by Former Youth Congress leader who is serving life term in the 1995 murder of his wife Naina Sahni and has sought release after having undergone 29 years of incarceration, including remission ordered by Courts.

Bench stated that,“Whether court can grant premature release or remand matter back to competent authority to hear the matter afresh? And does life mean life or are there any exceptions”, and  framed legal issues that will guide its decision.

Advocates Hariharan and Amit Sahni urged HC to intervene, arguing that there are enough precedents where Courts have freed convicts who finished a 25-year sentence.

HC agreed to examine the issue and hearing will continue on Thursday.

Earlier, High Court had termed its as “very serious” the human rights of those in jail.

Bench had further stated that,“A murder itself is brutal. He has already served the sentence. Does it not infringe upon his human rights, which are inalienable rights? The sentence review board (SRB) cannot say, ‘no this murder was brutal, so we will not release him’,” the bench had said.

Bench questioned that,“Then why should we keep him in jail indefinitely?”

Sushil Sharma has been in prison since 1995, contended that he had undergone the maximum prescribed sentence as mandated under the SRB guidelines.

He further submitted that norms on premature release state that life convicts sentenced for a single offence are to be released after completion of 20 years of incarceration and those committing heinous crimes are to be freed after 25 years.

Source TOI

Picture Source :