Jessica Lal Murder Case: Delhi Govt Files Reply To Manu Sharma's Plea For Premature Release

Delhi Government has filed its reply to murder convict Manu Sharma's remission plea before the Delhi High Court.

Manu Sharma is currently undergoing rigorous life imprisonment for offences under sections 302, 201 and 120B of the IPC, and section 27 of the Arms Act. He has already undergone actual sentence of 16 years and 7 months, and have also earned remission of approximately 6 years and 27 days.

As per the jail record, Manu Sharma has availed 11 parole granted by GNCTD/Delhi High Court and 22 furloughs granted by Director General (Prisons).

The reply states that the petitioner's application for early release has already been considered for 4 times by the Sentence Review Board. During the last consideration on 19/07/2019, all the board members had expressed their opposition to his premature release, with the exception of one member dissenting.

The dissenting member, an Additional District/Sessions Judge, supported Sharma's premature release in view of his good conduct in jail, lodgement in open prison, offence being not pre-meditated, and no objection from the victim's family.

The Board in its decision considered that the crime committed by the petitioner is not an ordinary crime. It had also relied upon the conviction order which states that his crime had shocked the society and his actions belied any possibility of him being reformed.

Considering that the impact on society is an important factor to be looked at while deciding on premature release of a convict, the Board rejected Sharma's plea by noting that allowing his premature release would send a wrong signal to the society.

The state also mentions in its reply that every plea for premature release is carefully scrutinised by the Sentence Review Board, as per the SRB Guidelines of 2004, and the provisions of the Delhi Prison Manual.

Therefore, it would be wrong to suggest that the Board did not pass a reasoned order, considering the Board in its deliberations gives weightage to every factor, which is also recorded in the minutes of the meeting.

The reply further goes on to state that as per the SRB Guidelines, the convict does not acquire a right to automatic release on completion of specific period of sentence. To effectuate the same, an economics explicit order of a Competent Authority, on the recommendation of the SRB, is required.

In support of the aforementioned argument, the petition also cites the law laid down by the Delhi High Court in the case of Shashi Shekhar @ Neeraj v. State of NCT of Delhi.

Finally, the reply suggests that the petition shall be dismissed for lack of merits, for as per Delhi Prison Rules, the reconsideration of a plea for premature release of a convict already rejected, shall be entertained after the expiry of a period of 6 months from the date of the consideration of his case.