New Delhi, March 30 – The Supreme Court has expressed strong dissatisfaction with the delay by the Gujarat government in deciding on a plea for the premature release of a life convict, warning that failure to adhere to policy timelines could result in "strict legal action", including suo motu contempt proceedings.
A bench of Justices Ahsanuddin Amanullah and R. Mahadevan said that despite granting more than three months' time earlier, the state government had failed to make a final decision on the petitioner's case, terming the authorities' stance as "completely unacceptable".
"Even today, the claim that the Committee is likely to make a decision soon is unacceptable," observed the Justice Amanullah-led bench.
The apex court was hearing a Special Leave Petition (SLP) filed by Mahesh Kumar Dhisalal Jangid, challenging a Gujarat High Court order.
In its previous order passed on December 12, 2025, the top court had noted the state government's submission that the petitioner's case for premature release would be considered in accordance with the Gujarat remission policy. Noting that the petitioner had already completed the minimum required period of incarceration for such consideration, the Justice Amanullah-led bench had granted time to the state government to make a decision and communicate it before the next hearing.
Referring to a 1992 circular issued under Section 432 of the Code of Criminal Procedure governing premature release, the Supreme Court highlighted that the policy itself mandates initiating the process three months prior to the completion of 14 years of imprisonment.
"From the aforesaid, it is clear that the policy itself indicates that a person, as and when he or she completes the said period, a final order has to be passed on that day," the order said.
The bench added that while premature release is not a fundamental right, it assumes the character of a vested right once a policy is framed by the state government.
Expressing concern over non-compliance, the top court said it could have initiated proceedings against all responsible officials but refrained from doing so for the time being.
"Accordingly, we could have initiated proceedings against all the concerned persons, right from the person who initiates the process till the person who actually/finally takes the decision. However, we refrain from doing so, for the present," the bench said.
It directed that the matter be listed on April 7, at the top of the board and cautioned that any future deviation from the policy would attract stringent consequences.
"It is further clarified that… this shall entail strict legal action from this Court, including, but not limited to, initiation of suo motu contempt," the order warned.
It also directed that its order be transmitted to the Chief Secretary for "strict compliance throughout the state".
Further, the Justice Amanullah-led Bench made it clear that if a final decision is not placed on record by the next date, senior officials, including the Chief Secretary, Home Secretary and Inspector General of Prisons, would have to remain personally present before the apex court.
"…the Chief Secretary and the Additional Chief Secretary/Secretary, Department of Home… and also the Inspector General of Prisons, Gujarat shall be personally present in Court to show-cause as to why proceedings be not initiated against them," it added.
