Gravity Of Offence Alone Can't Justify Denial Of Premature Release: Delhi High Court Orders Release Of Bangladeshi Life Convict
LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK
23 Feb 2026 5:45 PM IST
The Delhi High Court has ordered premature release of a Bangladeshi national, sentenced to life in a dacoity and murder case, holding that the gravity of the offence by itself cannot be the sole ground to deny premature release once the eligibility threshold under the applicable policy has been crossed.
Justice Sanjeev Narula thus set aside the decision of the Sentence Review Board (SRB) which had rejected his plea for premature release despite prolonged incarceration and satisfactory prison conduct.
The bench observed, “The gravity of the offence, even when undeniable, cannot become the single note refrain that drowns out every other mandatory consideration. In Satish @ Sabbe, the Supreme Court cautioned that “gravity of the original crime cannot be the sole basis” for refusing premature release, and that any assessment of future criminality must be grounded in antecedents and conduct during incarceration, rather than vague apprehensions.”
The petitioner had undergone over 21 years of actual imprisonment and more than 27 years with remission. He was repatriated to Bangladesh in 2021 to serve the remainder of his sentence. The commutation roll from the receiving jail recorded his conduct as satisfactory and law-abiding.
While rejecting his request, the SRB had relied primarily on the heinous nature of the offence and a broad apprehension that the petitioner could “reoffend”.
The High Court however found this approach unsustainable, observing,
“The State is right in asserting that the offence is grave. That reality does not evaporate with time. The policy itself recognizes the relevance of the circumstances and nature of the crime. However, the policy and the Rules also proceed on the premise that even serious offenders may, after prolonged incarceration and demonstrated reform, become eligible for a executive decision with due deliberation. The SRB's function is to perform that calibration. A decision that effectively stops at the caption “murder during dacoity” and then adds a speculative fear of recidivism does not amount to the calibrated assessment demanded by the governing framework.”
It further held that under the premature release policy, convicts acquire “right to a fair, meaningful, and non-arbitrary consideration” and that speculative apprehension of future risk, without an evidence-linked assessment of antecedents and prison conduct can't be used to defeat this right.
As such, the Court set aside the SRB's decision, declared that the petitioner is fit for premature release and directed the Delhi government to process his release.
Appearance: Mr. Sarthak Maggon, Advocate for Petitioner; Mr. Amit Tiwari, CGSC with Ms. Ayushi Srivastava, Mr. Ayush Tanwar, Mr. Kushagra Malik & Mr. Arpan Narwal, Advocates for UOI. Ms. Kamakshi Sehgal, Advocate for Union of India for Respondent
Case title: Asif @ Naeem v. State
Case no.: W.P.(CRL) 4309/2025