In Brief
This case concerns the scope of habeas corpus jurisdiction when prisoners seek release under a government premature-release scheme. The Supreme Court held that while habeas corpus protects against unlawful detention, detention pursuant to a valid court conviction is lawful. Parole and remission are discretionary privileges, not vested rights. The High Court cannot itself grant release under such schemes; it must direct the competent authority to decide applications within a reasonable timeframe. The Court set aside the High Court's orders directing immediate release in four cases but directed release in three cases using Article 142 powers, citing long incarceration and satisfactory rehabilitation. One case was remanded for fresh consideration within six weeks."
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.