Citing a Supreme Court judgment, the Court said that to deny premature release of a convict based entirely on the nature of crime committed in the distant past, would be to crush the life force out of such individual altogether.
“Thus, it defies logic as to why such past antecedents should cast a cloud on the present release of the petitioner.”
The Bench refused to accept the apprehension that the petitioner could resort to similar activities after being released.
“The very premise of the apprehension that the petitioner has not lost his potentiality is vitiated, since antecedents and associations of three decades back lose relevance in the teeth of utter disconnect of the petitioner with such antecedents and associations during the long incarceration and his good conduct throughout the period of custody. Thus, it defies logic as to why such past antecedents should cast a cloud on the present release of the petitioner,” the Court held.
Urging the authorities to reconsider Khalid’s premature release, the judge concluded,
“Not only will such act contribute another reformed citizen to the mainstream society, the same will set a good precedent for other convicts in prison to attempt emulation and shall act as a deterrent for them to be less than perfect in their conduct in prison.”
Source: Barandbench
