Supreme Court To Decide Validity Of J&K Policy Denying Remission To Terror-Offence Convicts

The Supreme Court will consider the validity the rule in Jammu and Kashmir which bars remission for terror convicts.

The Court decided to har a life convict's petition challenging Rule 54(1) of the Jammu & Kashmir Jail Manual, 2000 and Para 20.10(Chapter XX titled Commutation and Remission of Sentence) of J&K Prison Manual 2022, which disallows premature release to those convicted in relation to a terrorism offence, along other similar pending petitions. 

Pursuant to the November 22, 2024, order of the Court, his remission plea was considered, but was rejected in January by the J&K authorities on the grounds that he was convicted for terror-related crimes. On July 15, a bench comprising Justice Ahsanuddin Amanullah and Justice S.V.N. Bhatti allowed him to file an interlocutory application challenging the remission policy.

When the matter was taken up on November 11, a bench comprising Justice Amanullah and Justice KV Viswanathan allowed for the matter to be tagged with the rest.

"Accordingly, the present matter be tagged with SLP(Criminal) No. 1744 of 2025 and SLP(Criminal) Nos. 4434-4435 of 2025 (Nazir Ahmed Sheikh Vs. Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir & Anr. and Aashiq Hussain Factoo Vs. Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir & Ors.).

However, the Court recorded the submission of petitioner's counsel, Senior Advocate Colin Gonsalves, that there was no allegation of terrorism against him. Nor were the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act charges applicable to him as per the trial court's order.

Against this, Additional Solicitor General K.M. Nataraj responded that his case was considered and he was denied remission on the grounds that although TADA was not applied to him, he was arrested in connection with a case where the element of terrorism was involved in the backdrop. As per the allegations, when the dead bodies of the people he murdered were inspected, 5 bullets, 11 empty cartridges of an AK 47 rifle and one UGBL grenade thrower were recovered on the spot.

"We record that stand of learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner that the present case would not fall within the mischief of a 'terrorist act' as contemplated under the remission policy of the State Government. However, this position is disputed by the learned Additional Solicitor General appearing for the respondents."

The writ petition has been filed under Article 32 seeking premature release of the petitioner, having undergone 24 years and 11 months as on October 31, 2023.

The petitioner was convicted of murder under the Ranbir Penal Code and Section 7/27 of the Indian Arms Act by a Sessions Judge, Budgam, in 2010. He was sentenced to rigorous life imprisonment. He had illegally obtained weapons and killed certain surrendered militants who were working as a local source to the Indian Army.