SAGIR vs STATE (NCT OF DELHI) & ORS.

Judgment text excerpt

$~2 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: 08.07.2025 + W.P.(CRL) 1028/2025 SAGIR .....Petitioner Through: Ms. Gunjan Sinha Jain, Advocate versus STATE (NCT OF DELHI) & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Amol Sinha, ASC for the State with Mr. Kshitiz Garg, Advocate with Insp. Robin Singh and SI Hari Ram CORAM: JUSTICE GIRISH KATHPALIA JUDGMENT (ORAL) 1. The petitioner has assailed findings of the Sentence Review Board (SRB) which met on 30.08.2024 and 18.09.2024, whereby his plea for pre- mature release was rejected. The petitioner has also prayed for mandamus for his pre-mature release forthwith. 2. I have heard the learned counsel for petitioner as well as learned Addl. Standing Counsel on behalf of respondents. 3. Broadly speaking, the petitioner is undergoing life imprisonment in case FIR No. 360/2003 of PS Gandhi Nagar for offences under Section 302/366/376/377/511 IPC for kidnapping, rape and murder of 8 year’ old W.P.(CRL) 1028/2025 Page 1 of 3 pages GIRISH Digitally signed by GIRISH KATHPALIA Signature Not Verified KATHPALIA Date: 2025.07.08 17:17:18 +05'30' Digitally Signed By:NEETU N NAIR Signing Date:08.07.2025 17:36:35 girl. The petitioner has undergone imprisonment for more than 20 years eight months as on date without remission; and for a period of more than 24 years with remission. Case of the petitioner for pre-mature release was considered by the SRB in terms with the policy of 2004. 4. It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the impugned decision of SRB is not sustainable in law on account of the same being completely unreasoned and mechanical. Learned ASC, in all fairness, expresses inability to support the impugned decision, on account of it being not based on relevant factors. 5. It appears that the SRB