The Hindu : Front Page : Nalini moves Madras High Court seeking premature release

Online edition of India's National Newspaper
Thursday, May 01, 2008
ePaper | Mobile/PDA Version

Front Page

Front Page

Nalini moves Madras High Court seeking premature release

Special Correspondent

Says Advisory Board did not recommend her case
Rejection of request by government ‘arbitrary’

CHENNAI: The Madras High Court has ordered notice to the respondents on a plea by S. Nalini, who is serving life imprisonment in the case relating to Rajiv Gandhi’s assassination, seeking premature release. The notice is returnable by June 10.

In her petition, Nalini submitted that the death sentence on her was commuted to life imprisonment. Under the Cr.P.C. she had to complete 14 years of imprisonment for premature release, for which she was eligible from June 18, 2005, since she had completed 14 years on June 17, 2005. However, her name was not considered either in 2005 or 2006 or even 2007. She submitted that the Advisory Board, Special Prison for Women at Vellore, did not recommend her case. On October 31 last year, the government issued an order rejecting her request for premature release on the basis of the recommendation of the Additional Director-General of Prison. It was against this she filed the writ petition.

Nalini said the rejection of her request by the State government based on the recommendation of the Additional Director-General of Prison was arbitrary, illegal and without exercising the rules framed in the “Tamil Nadu Prison Rules, 1983.” Without considering her earned remission, the prison authorities sent a report to the government. Though the Probation Officer on March January 3, 2005 did not recommend her premature release, on July 1, 2007, he sent a report that she could be released prematurely with certain stringent conditions.

The report of the Advisory Board of December 28, 2006 and the subsequent order of the State Government were liable to be set aside, the petition said.

In her interim prayer, she sought a stay of the proceedings of the Advisory Board and the State government’s order.

When the matter came up before Justice P.Jyothimani on Wednesday, S.Doraisamy, senior counsel for Nalini, said the constitution of the Advisory Board itself was improper.

In the present case alone, the Collector, the Principal Sessions Judge and the Superintendent of Special Prison for Women, Vellore were appointed Chairman and Members respectively. As per the rules, the Inspector-General of Prison alone would be the Chairman and there should be other six members, including the Regional Probation Officer and one or more non-official members. The Additional Director-General of Prison had no say and his recommendation could not form the basis for the government to take a decision, he said.

Printer friendly page
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Front Page