The Supreme Court on Friday held that the executive cannot deny remission solely on grounds of the crime being heinous paving the way for the premature release of a life convict, 22 years after he was jailed in the 2003 Madhumita Shukla murder case in Uttar Pradesh.
The convict, Rohit Chaturvedi had challenged the decision of the Ministry of Home Affairs passed on July 9, 2025, denying his remission plea. He alleged that the former UP legislator Amarmani Tripathi, his co-accused had been allowed premature release after 17 years of his life term while he was kept under incarceration despite the Uttarakhand government favouring his remission plea. As the case was investigated by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) and the case was tried in Uttarakhand, the MHA response was sought. As the July 2025 order failed to provide reasons, the Centre argued in the top court that the petitioner cannot be released as the crime was heinous.
Setting aside the MHA order, a bench of justices BV Nagarathna and Ujjal Bhuyan said, “We wish to make it clear that in a constitutional polity governed by the rule of law, the denial of remission cannot rest solely on the ground of heinousness of the crime.”
The court listed out four grounds to take a view contrary to that of the Centre – prisoner’s good conduct in jail, 22 years of incarceration, co-accused being granted remission, and reformative theory behind criminal justice system.
As the petitioner was already granted interim bail by the court in August 2025, the court directed the authorities to treat him as having been prematurely released in terms of the court’s order.
Madhmita Shukla, a poet who allegedly had an affair with the former UP legislator, was shot dead outside her house in May 2003, at a time when she was seven months pregnant.