“Unless There Is A Threat Of Contempt, You Never Decide Remission Case”: Supreme Court Issues Contempt Notice To Delhi Home Secretary

The Supreme Court has issued a contempt notice to the Principal Secretary of the Home Department, Delhi Government, for failing to take a decision on granting remission to Sukhdev Singh, a convict in the Nitish Katara murder case, despite giving an undertaking to the court.

The court, in its order, noted, “A solemn statement on instructions of the state government was recorded in the order. Now we are informed that the SRB is to consider the case of the petitioner today. The state government has not shown elementary courtesy of even making an explanation application for grant of extension of time. We therefore issue notice to the Principal Secretary of the Home Department of Delhi government calling upon him to show cause why action under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 should not be initiated against him. Notice of contempt is made returnable on 28th of March. We direct the Secretary to remain present through VC.”

A bench of Justice Abhay Oka and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan expressed displeasure over the delay, pointing out that the Delhi Government regularly delays such matters.

Justice Oka remarked, “We have seen that without extension of time, this government will never comply with the orders of this court regarding remission. We are seeing it in every case. Earlier there was an excuse that the Chief Minister is not available.”

The court noted that the Delhi Government had previously made a solemn assurance to decide the matter within two weeks, but the Sentence Review Board (SRB) had not yet considered the plea.

On March 3, 2025, the Supreme Court had recorded the assurance of the Additional Solicitor General appearing for the State that the petitioner's remission case would be considered and decided within two weeks. The court had accepted this assurance and directed that the case be listed today (March 17, 2025).

However, today, the counsel appearing for Delhi Government informed the Court that the Sentence Review Board is supposed to have a meeting today to decide the case.

Justice Oka did not appreciate that the decision had not been taken and the government did not even apply for an extension, “You don't even have the courtesy to apply for an extension of time. You make a solemn statement that you will decide within two weeks, and your Sentence Review Board (SRB) has not considered it.”

The counsel for the Delhi Government stated that the High Court had mandated that the complainant must be heard before considering remission, and a notice has been sent to the complainants.

She added that the complainants had submitted detailed representations before the SRB, expressing that they faced a threat from the convict. However, Justice Oka pointed out that the Court did not compel the state to undertake that a decision will be within two weeks, “Day in and day out, this is happening. We did not ask you to make an undertaking.”

The Counsel for Delhi submitted that the final meeting of the SRB was scheduled for today. Justice Oka responded, “Then it will go to the Chief Minister, then to the Governor. Please tell us who is in-charge of this department. We will issue a contempt notice.”

Justice Oka criticized the repeated delays and remarked that the government failed to comply with orders unless threatened with contempt action. “Is there a rule with the Delhi government that whenever the Supreme Court passes an order to decide a case, it will not be decided within the time? We will issue a notice of contempt to you. Unless there is a threat of contempt, you will never decide a case”, he said.

Justice Oka also remarked, “We can find at least two dozen orders having similar issues.”

The counsel for the Delhi Government assured the court that the case is being considered. However, Justice Oka responded, “This is your own statement. We never compelled you to make this statement. We believe that unless contempt notice is issued, our orders are not followed.”

The contempt notice is returnable on March 28, 2025, and the court directed the Principal Secretary to remain present through video conferencing.

Previously also, the Court issued a contempt notice to the Delhi Home Secretary in another case relating to remission.

Case no. – SLP(Crl) No. 17915/2024 Diary No. 58673 / 2024

Case Title – Sukhdev Yadav @ Pehalwan v. State of (NCT of Delhi)