Supreme Court’s Landmark Decision on Life Imprisonment

The Supreme Court has issued a significant ruling regarding life imprisonment sentences, emphasizing that convicts who have completed their fixed-term sentences must be released. This decision came in light of the case involving Sukhdev Pehalwan, also known as Sukhdev Yadav, who was convicted in the 2002 Nitish Katara murder case. The court highlighted that Pehalwan, having served his 20-year sentence, should be released without the need for a remission order, which is typically required for those sentenced to life imprisonment without a fixed term.

Concerns Over Unlawful Detention

The court expressed serious concerns about individuals who remain incarcerated despite having completed their sentences. Justices BV Nagarathna and KV Vishwanathan questioned the rationale behind keeping Pehalwan in jail beyond his term, warning that such practices could lead to convicts dying in prison unnecessarily. The court’s directive mandates the immediate release of all convicts who have served their prescribed terms.

Sentence Review Board’s Controversial Decision

Despite the Supreme Court’s earlier order for Pehalwan’s release on July 29, the Sentence Review Board blocked it, citing his conduct as a reason. This prompted Pehalwan to file a petition with the Supreme Court, which granted him a three-month furlough until a final decision was reached. The court criticized the Sentence Review Board for disregarding its order and questioned their behavior.

Debate Over Life Term Definitions

The case also sparked a debate over the definition of a ‘life term.’ Additional Solicitor General Archana Pathak Dave argued that a life term implies spending one’s natural life in prison. However, senior advocate Siddharth Mridul countered this by stating that Pehalwan’s sentence had concluded on March 9, and there was no legal basis for his continued detention.