Delhi High Court - Orders
Chetan vs State Of Nct Of Delhi on 31 October, 2025
Author: Sanjeev Narula
Bench: Sanjeev Narula
$~2
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ W.P.(CRL) 622/2025
CHETAN .....Petitioner
Through: Ms. Vrinda Bhandari, Ms. Anandita
Rana, Ms. Shrutika Pandey, Ms.
Raagini Nagpal, Advocates
versus
STATE OF NCT OF DELHI .....Respondent
Through: Mr. Amol Sinha, ASC for the State
with Mr. Kshitiz Garg, Mr. Nitish
Dhawan, Ms. Chavi Lazarus, Mr.
Anshul Sharma, Ms. Sanskriti
Nimbekar, Advocates along with SI
Gaurav, PS Kalyanpuri
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV NARULA
ORDER
% 31.10.2025
1. The present petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, assails the minutes of meeting dated 21st December, 2023,1 of the Sentence Review Board2, whereby the Petitioner's request for premature release was rejected.
2. The Petitioner is a convict serving life imprisonment for conviction under Sections 376(2)(g) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 in FIR No. 571/1997 registered at P.S. Kalyan Puri for the offence of gang rape of a 1 "impugned minutes"
2"SRB/the board"W.P.(CRL) 622/2025 Page 1 of 5
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 03/11/2025 at 23:08:09 Nepali national woman committed in a premeditated manner. The Trial Court had convicted the Petitioner by judgment dated 20th December, 1999, and had sentenced him to life imprisonment. The petitioner preferred Criminal Appeal No. 28 of 2000, which was dismissed by the judgment of this Court dated 16th July, 2015. The Petitioner's challenge to the said judgment was dismissed by the Supreme Court on 14th August, 2017 for non-prosecution.
3. Upon becoming eligible for premature release as per the policy dated 16th July, 2004, issued by the Government of NCT of Delhi,3 the case of the Petitioner was considered and rejected by minutes of meeting held on 27th August, 2021, 30th June, 2023 and last on 21st December, 2023. The impugned minutes are assailed on the ground that they do not conform to the applicable legal framework, including the 2004 Policy and the Delhi Prison Rules, 2018, and that the rejection is based on insufficient reasoning, without due consideration of relevant reformative indicators and without application of mind. The impugned minutes read as follows:
"Minutes of SRB Meeting held on 21st December, 2023 ITEM NO. 13 CHETAN S/O SH. BHOJI RAM -- AGE-42 YRS.
This case has been put up in compliance to the order dated 06.09.2023 in Writ Petition(s) (Criminal) No(s). 397/2023 passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the matter of Chetan & Ors. Vs. State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi), wherein it was directed to the Respondent "to consider the cases of the petitioners for pre-mature release in accordance with law Chetan Sb Sh. Bhoji Ram is undergoing life imprisonment in case FIR No. 571/1997, U/S 376 (2) (G)/34 IPC, P.S. Kalyan Puri, Delhi for committing gang rape with a 25 years Nepal national lady.
The convict has undergone:
Imprisonment of 13 years, 07 months & 22 days in actual and 17 years, 01 3 "2004 Policy"W.P.(CRL) 622/2025 Page 2 of 5
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 03/11/2025 at 23:08:09 month & 19 days with remission. He has availed Parole 04 times and Furlough 14 times.
This case has been considered under Delhi Prison Rules, 2018 and also in view of guidelines-order dated 16.07.2004 issued by the Govt. of NCT of Conclusion:
The Board considered the reports received from Police and Social Welfare Departments for premature release of convict and took into the account all the facts and circumstances of the case. It is serious case of crime against women. It is a crime where the crime was committed (gang rape of a Nepal national woman who was in friendly terms with convict), in a pre- meditated way. The police has opposed the premature release; the possibility of committing crime again cannot be ruled out. It has also been considered that he is already availing parole and furlough as per law and therefore his connection within the society are maintained. Given the back drop as mentioned, the Board unanimously decided to REJECT premature release of convict Chetan S/o Sh. Bhoji Ram at this stage."
4. The Court has heard the submissions made by the Counsel for the Petitioner and has perused the police report, the Social Investigation Report and the impugned minutes. As per the nominal roll dated 26th March, 2025, the Petitioner has already undergone 15 years, 02 months, and 11 days of actual incarceration and earned 03 years, 11 months, and 09 days of remission. He has been granted parole 04 times and furlough on 14 occasions during his incarceration. His conduct during each of these periods has been satisfactory, with the exception of three instances of late surrender. The Petitioner's behaviour within the prison has also been found to be satisfactory, except for the aforementioned late surrenders. The nominal roll also reflects that no other criminal cases are pending against the Petitioner. The Social investigation report dated 5th June, 2023, mentions that the Petitioner's case appears to be fit for positive consideration by the SRB. The Probation Officer has also opined that the Petitioner will successfully reintegrate in the society and live within the purview of law.
5. Despite these positive indicators, the Board has rejected his request W.P.(CRL) 622/2025 Page 3 of 5 This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 03/11/2025 at 23:08:09 citing, the gravity and manner of the offence, opposition by the police and the possibility of committing a crime again. The board has assigned no cogent reasons to the merits of the case of the Petitioner except for emphasising on the gravity of the offence. This approach runs contrary to the principle laid down in Rajo v. State of Bihar,4 wherein the Supreme Court held that although the nature and societal impact of the offence are relevant considerations for the SRB, they cannot be the sole ground to deny release, particularly when other material factors indicate reform.
6. The Board's order also does not meaningfully engage with the reformative progress of the Petitioner, as documented in the Social Investigation Report and the opinion of the Probation Officer, both of which support a positive consideration of his case. These reports suggest that the Petitioner has shown signs of rehabilitation and may be reintegrated into society as a law-abiding citizen.
7. In Santosh Kumar Singh v. State,5 this Court has recently examined the approach adopted by the SRB in considering cases of premature release. The approach was found lacking in terms of legal compliance, reasoning, and adherence to the reformative framework envisaged under Rule 1244 of the Delhi Prison Rules, 2018. It was, inter alia, emphasised that while the gravity of the offence may be a relevant factor, it cannot be the sole or overriding basis for rejection, and that the SRB is required to assess reformation, conduct, and likelihood of reintegration.
8. Upon consideration of the submissions and perusal of the impugned minutes, in light of the legal principles discussed above, this Court is of the 4 2023 SCC OnLine SC 1068 5 2025:DHC:5138 W.P.(CRL) 622/2025 Page 4 of 5 This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 03/11/2025 at 23:08:09 view that the reasons recorded in the impugned minutes suffer from the same infirmities as those discussed in Santosh Kumar Singh. The decision appears to be founded principally on the nature of the offence and the objection by the police, without meaningful consideration of the Petitioner's jail conduct, psychological assessments (if any), or any evidence indicating the absence of reform. For these reasons, the Court finds the SRB's decision to be inadequately reasoned and contrary to the settled principles governing premature release.
9. Accordingly, in view of the above and in light of the judgment of this Court in Santosh Kumar Singh, the impugned SRB minutes dated 21st December, 2023 are set aside qua the Petitioner. The matter is remanded back to the SRB for reconsideration in accordance with law, keeping in mind the principles, and observations made hereinabove, without being influenced by the earlier decision.
10. The SRB shall endeavour to consider the Petitioner's case in its forthcoming meeting, and if not feasible, positively in the next meeting thereafter, and shall pass a reasoned order within three months from the date of this order.
11. The Petition is disposed of in the above terms.
SANJEEV NARULA, J OCTOBER 31, 2025/ab W.P.(CRL) 622/2025 Page 5 of 5 This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 03/11/2025 at 23:08:09