In Brief
A TADA-convicted prisoner serving a life sentence applied for parole after 10 years of incarceration. The High Court dismissed his petition, treating the seriousness of the crime as grounds for automatic denial. The Supreme Court clarified that while serious offences warrant stricter scrutiny, parole cannot be denied solely on crime severity. The Court held that individualized assessment of reformation, jail conduct, and public safety is essential. Here, authorities properly rejected parole based on reports of potential public disorder, threats to victims, and safety concerns—not crime severity alone. The appeal was dismissed, but the Court noted the convict could reapply in future if circumstances improve.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.