The Supreme Court strongly criticized the Madhya Pradesh government for not releasing the convict, which had completed his seven -year sentence and due to which he was imprisoned for more than 4.7 years. A bench of Justice JB Pardiwala and Justice KV Vishwanathan expressed serious concern over the state’s lapse and held the officials accountable for the increased imprisonment of the convict. The court directed the Madhya Pradesh government to give compensation of Rs 25 lakh to the convict. The court also criticized the misleading affidavits filed by the state counsel in this case.
Also read this: Israel hung Palestinian prisoners: Supreme Court
What was the matter?
The convict was originally sentenced to life imprisonment under Section 376 (1), 450 and 560B of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) by a Sessions Court of Madhya Pradesh in 2004, but in 2007, Madhya Pradesh High Court reduced its sentence to seven years. Despite completing his sentence in 2014, he was not released until June 2023 and had to spend 4.7 years more in jail. The case came to light when the convict filed a petition demanding justice to stay in jail for longer than the prescribed sentence. The Supreme Court initially stated that the convict had imprisoned wrong imprisonment for more than eight years, but senior advocate Nachiketa Joshi, who later represented the state of Madhya Pradesh, said that the convict has been out on bail for some time.
Also read this: Yes Milord: SC/ST Act will not be the same now? What condition did Supreme Court impose on bail
Although the initial presentation indicates that the convict was imprisoned for eight additional years, further clarification showed that the period of incorrect imprisonment was about 4.7 years. The court questioned the state manner of handling the case, especially when it was revealed that “misleading” affidavits were filed, which gave the wrong details of the deadline for the release of the convict. Justice Pardiwala and Justice Vishwanathan highlighted the importance of transparency and accountability and emphasized that such flaws could not be ignored in the judicial process, especially when they are associated with fundamental human rights such as personal freedom. In view of unjustly long imprisonment, the Supreme Court ordered a compensation of Rs 25 lakh to the convict. The court also directed the Madhya Pradesh Legal Services Authority to conduct a practice to identify other people who have faced a similar imprisonment due to the state’s negligence.