Delhi High Court Initiates Suo Motu Proceedings To Monitor Implementation Of Policies On Remission, Premature Release Of Convicts
Nupur Thapliyal
10 Dec 2025 4:01 PM IST
The Delhi High Court on Wednesday initiated suo motu proceedings to monitor and supervise the implementation of policies concerning the remission and premature release of convicts in the national capital.
A division bench comprising Chief Justice DK Upadhyaya and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela appointed Senior Advocate Siddharth Agarwal as amicus curiae in the matter.
The proceedings have been initiated after a recent Supreme Court order in “In Re Policy Strategy For Grant Of Bail.”
The Apex Court had directed the Chief Justices of the High Courts to register a suo moto writ petition and thereafter, a Division Bench shall be constituted to monitor and supervise the implementation of the remission and premature release polices of the respective States.
In pursuance to the Supreme Court order, the Court today shall that the suo motu petition shall encompass monitoring and supervising the implementation of the remission and premature release policies in the State of Delhi.
The Bench directed the Delhi Government to file an affidavit in respect of the current policies regarding remission and premature release of the convicts.
The Court said that the affidavit shall also include any circulars, Rules, Regulations or government orders issued on the subject.
The response has to be filed by the Additional Chief Secretary of Delhi Government's Home Affairs department.
The matter will now be heard on January 13, 2026.
The Apex Court had passed the directive after expressing displeasure over the failure to implement remission and premature release policies in the States of Assam, Himachal Pradesh, Meghalaya, Uttar Pradesh and West Bengal.
The Apex Court had advised the State governments to initiate the premature release process of the eligible convict “at least six months prior to the eligibility of a convict so that unwanted time by way of incarceration even after a convict becomes eligible for premature release can very well be avoided.”
Title: Court on its own motion v. State