Pyschological Evaluation Of Convict Crucial To Decide Premature Release: Delhi HC Calls For Involvement Of Mental Health Professionals

The Delhi High Court has recommended to the Delhi Government and the Prisons Department to take expeditious steps to institutionalise the involvement of mental health professionals in the premature release process of convicts. Justice Sanjeev Narula issued various guidelines to ensure that the decisions of the Sentence Review Board (SRB) are aligned with the objectives of the premature release Policy and are conducted in accordance with the constitutional imperatives of fairness, non-arbitrariness and reasoned decision-making. Observing that structural reform is necessary to guarantee that future SRB determinations are not only procedurally compliant but also substantively fair and just, the Court issued the following guidelines:- A system for psychological assessment of eligible convicts carried out, by qualified clinical psychologists or psychiatrists, should be introduced, either by amending the existing framework under the DPR or by issuing appropriate administrative guidelines.- The role of the Probation Officer, while integral, must be supplemented by such expert input. In appropriate cases, the SRB may also consider calling for independent psychological evaluations, especially where the decision hinges on the convict's likelihood to reoffend. - The Court further recommends that the GNCTD evolve a structured protocol for incorporating victim perspectives in the premature release process. While the Social Welfare Department's pro forma includes a field for “victim response”, its current implementation is haphazard and inconsistent. - A clear procedure should be established to locate, contact, and document the views of victims or their families in a sensitive and time- bound manner, ensuring their voices are heard without causing re-traumatisation. - Where such input cannot be obtained despite reasonable efforts, the Social Welfare Officer must provide a reasoned report indicating the steps taken and the reasons for non-availability.- The SRB should also maintain a written record of whether victim input was received or solicited, and how such input was weighed in the final decision. Justice Narula observed that the current framework does not require or contemplate a formal psychological evaluation conducted by a qualified mental health professional, a shortcoming which was significant.The Court said that a convict's transformation into a potentially reformed individual cannot be meaningfully evaluated without examining the underlying psychological trajectory.The Court was dealing with a batch of petitions filed by convicts serving life sentence in four cases, including one filed by Santosh Kumar Singh, convicted in the 1996 rape and murder case of law student Priyadarshini Mattoo in the national capital.They challenged the rejection of their claims for premature release by the SRB, contending that the impugned decisions as well as its approval by the Lt. Governor, Delhi were unreasoned, mechanical, and insensitive to their post conviction conduct.The Court set aside the SRB decisions in three petitions and remanded the matter to the SRB for fresh consideration. However, it upheld the decision in one case. Regarding Singh's case, the Court said that while the SRB minutes briefly noted a positive recommendation by the Social Welfare Department, the same was neither discussed nor reconciled with the contrary police report in the impugned decision. It added that no effort was made to evaluate Singh's demonstrable reformative progress, including advanced educational qualifications, documented good conduct and participation in rehabilitation programmes.“Thus, in the opinion of this Court, the impugned decision of the SRB cannot be sustained. The rejection order neither discloses a meaningful application of mind nor does it reflect a reasoned analysis of the reformative efforts made by the Petitioner,” the Court said. Also Read: Priyadarshini Mattoo Case: Delhi High Court Finds 'Element Of Reformation' In Life Convict, Orders Review Of Plea For Early ReleaseTitle: SANTOSH KUMAR SINGH v. STATE (GOVT. OF THE NCT) OF DELHI and other connected mattersClick here to read order

Pyschological Evaluation Of Convict Crucial To Decide Premature Release: Delhi HC Calls For Involvement Of Mental Health Professionals

Nupur Thapliyal

Tags