This is an archive article published on May 30, 2025
High court strikes down Punjab formula for premature release of prisoners
The high court found the Punjab government’s formula that excluded parole from actual custody—as an undertrial and post-conviction—lacked legal backing.
The court held that Singh’s case must be considered under the 1991 premature release policy, which requires 10 years of actual imprisonment and 14 years, including remission. (File photo)
The Punjab and Haryana High Court has ruled that parole must be deducted from the total sentence, including remission, and not from the actual sentence, which covers only the time spent in custody while considering eligibility for premature release of prisoners. Setting aside the Punjab government’s October 2024 order denying life convict Rupinder Singh’s release, the court directed a fresh assessment of his case within four weeks.
Justice Harpreet Singh Brar, who delivered the ruling on May 29, also struck down the state’s 2020 formula that excluded parole from the actual sentence. “The formula prescribed in meeting dated 16.07.2020 is held to be invalid, being in direct contravention of Section 3(3) of the Act of 1962… It is directed that the parole period shall only be subtracted from the total sentence and not from the actual sentence,” the court said.
The court found the state’s formula—actual custody during undertrial plus custody post-conviction, minus the parole period—lacked legal backing and contradicted the Punjab Good Conduct of Prisoners (Temporary Release) Act, 1962. Section 3(3) of the Act states: “The period of release under this section shall not count towards the total period of the sentence of a prisoner.”
Interpreting this, Justice Brar clarified, “Actual sentence must be interpreted to mean the real time spent by a prisoner behind bars. and therefore, has two parts only i.e. (i) Actual time undergone in custody as an undertrial and (ii) Actual time undergone as a convict. Thus, the quantum of actual sentence is a matter of fact, a constant number…Total sentence, for the purpose of premature release, would include the actual sentence undergone by the prisoner and the remission earned by him.”
The court held that Singh’s case must be considered under the 1991 premature release policy, which requires 10 years of actual imprisonment and 14 years, including remission. Citing Raj Kumar vs. State of Uttar Pradesh, 2024(9) SCC 598, the court said, “The State having formulated Rules and a Standing Policy for deciding cases of premature release, it is bound by its own formulations of law… It must strictly abide by the terms of its policies bearing in mind the fundamental principle of law that each case for premature release has to be decided on the basis of the legal position as it stands on the date of the conviction.”
The court also referred to Avtar Singh vs. State of Haryana, 2002 SCC (Cri.) 504, noting, “Ordinarily, the period of temporary release of a prisoner on parole needs to be counted towards the total period of detention, but this condition can be curtailed by legislative act, rules, instructions or terms of the grant of parole.” As no such legal change had been made, the court said Section 3(3) remained applicable.
Rupinder Singh was convicted of murder on August 11, 2014, by the Sessions Court in Hoshiarpur under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code. His conviction was upheld by the high court on October 3, 2019, and by the Supreme Court on November 22, 2019.
Story continues below this ad
Seeking premature release under the 1991 policy, Singh’s case was considered by the court on January 16, 2024. The state later challenged this, and on March 24, 2025, the Supreme Court allowed it to file a review petition. The key issue was whether over three years of Singh’s parole should be deducted from his actual time served or from the total sentence. The state’s 2020 clarification favoured the former, delaying his eligibility.
Singh’s lawyers, Nandan Jindal and Tushar Sabherwal, argued that the 2020 clarification was applied retrospectively and violated constitutional rights under Articles 14, 19, and 21. They cited Jai Kishan @ Bhola vs. State of Punjab (2022) and Baljeet Singh @ Rangi vs. State of Punjab (2022). Deputy Advocate General Pardeep Bajaj, appearing for the state, relied on Rohan Dhungat vs. State of Goa (2023 AIR SC 265), but the court held it was not applicable due to differences in state laws.
Justice Brar noted, “The objective behind the Act of 1962 is humanitarian in nature… Ensuring that the incarcerated have healthy roots in the society greatly assists in their rehabilitation and reintegration.”
Manraj Grewal Sharma is a senior journalist and the Resident Editor of The Indian Express in Chandigarh, where she leads the newspaper’s coverage of north India’s most politically and institutionally significant regions. From Punjab and Haryana to Himachal Pradesh and the Union Territory of Chandigarh, she oversees reporting at the intersection of governance, law, politics and society. She also reports on the diaspora, especially in Canada and the US.
With a career spanning journalism across several countries, academia and international development, Manraj brings a rare depth of perspective to regional reporting. She is widely regarded as a leading chronicler of Punjab’s contemporary history and socio-political evolution, particularly its long shadow of militancy, federal tensions and identity politics. Her book, Dreams after Darkness, remains a definitive account of the militancy years and their enduring aftermath.
Professional Background & Expertise
A gold medalist in mass communication and a post-graduate in English literature, Manraj has a multifaceted career spanning journalism, academia, and international development. She was also awarded a fellowship by National Foundation of India and did several in-depth pieces on Manipur. Internationally, she has reported from Israel, US, UK, Myanmar, and Mauritius
Her key focus areas include:
Regional Politics, History, Agriculture, Diaspora, and Security. Of late, she has started focusing on Legal & Judicial Affairs: Much of her recent work involves reporting on high-stakes cases in the Punjab and Haryana High Court, ranging from environmental policy to civil rights.
International Consulting: She previously served as a consulting editor for the Asia Pacific Adaptation Network and a publishing consultant for the Asian Development Bank (ADB) in Manila.
Academia: For five years, she was the managing editor of Gender, Technology and Development, a peer-reviewed international journal at the Asian Institute of Technology, Bangkok.
Recent Notable Articles (Late 2025)
Her recent reportage focuses heavily on judicial interventions and regional governance:
1. Environment & Governance
"‘NGT can’t test legality of policy’: HC hears challenge to Punjab’s ‘Green Habitat’ plan" (Dec 22, 2025): Covering a critical legal battle over whether the National Green Tribunal has the authority to strike down a state policy regularizing farmhouses on delisted forest land.
"High court pulls up Punjab poll panel over audio clip probe" (Dec 10, 2025): Reporting on judicial concerns regarding the transparency and fairness of local body elections.
2. Legal Rights & Social Welfare
"HC issues notice to Punjab, Haryana over delay in building old age homes" (Dec 22, 2025): Reporting on a contempt petition against top officials for failing to establish government-run homes for the elderly as promised in 2019.
"Victims can appeal acquittals in sessions court without seeking special leave" (Dec 19, 2025): Highlighting a significant procedural shift in criminal law following a Supreme Court ruling.
"HC upholds benefits for Punjab FCI officer acquitted in 20-year-old bribery case" (Dec 19, 2025): A report on the concept of "honourable acquittal" and its impact on employee benefits.
3. Human Rights & Identity
"As Punjab denies parole to MP Amritpal Singh, HC asks it to submit ‘foundational material’" (Dec 1, 2025): Covering the legal proceedings regarding the radical preacher and sitting MP's request to attend Parliament.
"Protecting life paramount: HC backs Muslim woman in live-in after verbal divorce" (Nov 6, 2025): Analyzing judicial protections for personal liberty in the context of traditional practices.
Signature Beats
Manraj is recognized for her ability to decode complex judicial rulings and relate them to the everyday lives of citizens. Whether it is a 30-year-old land battle in Fazilka or the political implications of Kangana Ranaut’s candidacy in Mandi, her writing provides deep historical and regional context.
Contact
@grewal_sharma on X
manrajgrewalsharma on Instagram ... Read More
