In Brief
A man convicted under the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act for terrorist activities, criminal conspiracy, and smuggling arms sought premature release after serving 14+ years. The High Court granted parole based on human rights concerns, but the Supreme Court reversed this. The Court held that a life sentence does not automatically expire after 20 years or earned remissions. The appropriate Government has sole discretion on parole/premission, subject to narrow judicial review. Since Gujarat reasonably rejected release citing the convict's terrorist network, disruptive activities, and security threat, the High Court erred in granting parole without legal justification. The appeal was allowed and the convict was permitted to petition the Union of India.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.