The Supreme Court on Tuesday raised concerns over the continued custody of Sukhdev Pehelwan, a convict in the 2002 Nitish Katara murder case, who has already served 20 years of his life sentence.
The bench, headed by justice Abhay S Oka, allowed Sukhdev to file an amended plea seeking his release, noting that his fixed term of 20 years had been completed.
The court took issue with a technical objection raised by the Delhi government. The state had argued that Sukhdev’s petition should only be considered for release on furlough, not for the release based on the ground that he has completed his fixed term sentence of 20 years.
Justice Oka objected to such an approach by the state. The bench, also comprising justice Ujjal Bhuyan, said, “We are dealing with liberty of an individual… This objection implies we are hearing something that is not raised before us.”
Posting the matter for May 7, the court said, “If we find that he is kept in detention beyond what is permissible, each day will be counted as illegal detention, and it cannot have the imprimatur of this court.”
What irked the court most was the fact that this objection was not raised by the Delhi government on last two occasions when the matter was listed in February and March this year when the top court had placed the matter for Tuesday (April 22) with a clear understanding that the issue of Sukhdev’s release will be considered on this day.
The objection came only after over half an hour of arguments by additional solicitor general (ASG) Archana Pathak Dave, who appeared for the Delhi government, by which time the court had discharged other matters for the day, with the expectation that only this case would be heard.
As justice Oka is expected to retire in a month, he observed, “I never wanted to face such a situation in the fag end of my career that I should not hear a case.”
Despite the procedural setback, the court directed Sukhdev’s lawyer to file a fresh petition for release based on the completion of his 20-year sentence. The Delhi government was asked to file its response by May 2.
Senior advocate Siddharth Mridul, appearing for Sukhdev, requested the court to consider releasing him on furlough till the next date of hearing as he pointed out that the 20-year incarceration for his client ended in March this year. On March 28, the Sentence Review Board (SRB) had dismissed Sukhdev’s case for premature release claiming that he still carries “potential for committing crime”.
ASG Dave told the court that as per the October 2016 judgment of the Supreme Court upholding the conviction of Sukhdev along with Vikas Yadav, son of former Member of Parliament DP Yadav, and his cousin Vishal in the 2002 Nitish Katara murder, the court categorically held that the 20-year stipulation was only applicable as a restriction on consideration of remission and it did not convey the meaning that after expiry of the same, he shall be entitled to automatic release.
She pointed out that such an interpretation will have a bearing on Vikas Yadav as well who, by the same judgment, was directed to undergo a fixed sentence term of 25 years before being considered for remission.
The bench told Dave that it was open for the state to seek a clarification of the SC judgment. “The judgment clearly says fixed sentence of 20 years. It was for you to challenge this part of the judgment.”
The complainant, mother of Nitish Katara, who was represented in court by senior advocate Aparajita Singh, raised objection on Mridul appearing for the convict, as while being a former judge of Delhi high court, he heard the parole pleas of Vikas Yadav.
The bench took note of this objection and left it for Mridul to decide whether he wished to continue appearing in the case.
Leave a Reply