In the affidavit filed by the State, the principle objection to the premature release was that when the petitioner was released on interim bail for three weeks in 2005, he absconded for 5 years until he was rearrested in 2010.
The Court noted that the petitioner was deprived of four furloughs for his conduct.
The Court further noted that the policy of state as on 1992 facilitates the premature release if 14 years is served.
The Court, therefore, held that the plea by the petitioner for premature release should be reconsidered by the State.
Source: Barandbench
