The Supreme Court of India granted furlough to Vikas Yadav, convicted in the Nitish Katara case, until March 7 for Holi, noting he served 23 years of a 25-year sentence without remission.
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court granted furlough to Nitish Katara murder convict Vikas Yadav until March 7 so he can spend time with his family during Holi.
The order was issued by a Bench of Justice MM Sundresh and Justice Vipul M Pancholi which observed that Yadav has served 23 years of a sentence that mandates 25 years without remission.
The Court ordered,
“Furlough is now sought on the ground that he wishes to spend time during Holi. Without going into the merits, we permit the petitioner to be released on furlough till 7 March,”
The bench made the order after expressing disagreement with the complainant’s counsel’s objection to the furlough request.
Justice Sundresh remarked,
“You want to hang him? Is it? What is the point of hearing you in this matter? After 23 years, you don’t want to let things go. We need to let things go. Our biggest problem in life is, we don’t let things go. What he has done, has been done,”
The judge added that granting such relief can at times aid a prisoner’s rehabilitation.
Justice Sundresh observed,
“In the Madras High Court, I granted furlough to everyone who had been sentenced to life imprisonment in a bomb blast case. After that period ended and they returned to prison, their behaviour had changed. Over time, they developed a sense of remorse,”
ALSO READ: Nitish Katara Murder Case || Supreme Court Grants 3-Month Furlough to Sukhdev Yadav
Factual Backgrounds:
Nitish Katara, a 25-year-old business executive, was abducted from a marriage party on the night of February 16 and 17, 2002 and murdered by Vikas Yadav and his relatives of politician DP Yadav due to his relationship with Bharti Yadav, Vikas’s sister.
The crime was labeled an “honour killing,” rooted in issues of caste and family honor. Katara’s charred remains were discovered near Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh. After several years of trials and appeals, both Vikas and Vishal Yadav received life sentences.
In his application, Vikas Yadav contested the DG Prisons’ decision to reject his plea for release, claiming he has served more than 23 years of a fixed 25-year sentence for life imprisonment.
In May 2008, the trial court convicted Vikas Yadav, Vishal Yadav, and their accomplice, contract killer Sukhdev Pehelwan, for kidnapping and burning Katara alive, sentencing them to life imprisonment. The High Court in February 2015 upheld the life sentences for Vikas and Vishal, specifying a 30-year term without remission, while Sukhdev received a 25-year sentence without remission.
The Supreme Court adjusted Vikas and Vishal’s sentences in July 2016 to 25 years without remission and modified Sukhdev’s sentence to 20 years without remission. On July 29, the Supreme Court ordered Sukhdev’s immediate release but dismissed Vikas’s petition regarding the requirement to serve 25 years without remission, allowing him to approach the Delhi High Court instead. In August 2017, the Supreme Court also rejected Yadav’s plea for a review of the 2016 order.
On February 11, the Delhi High Court had rejected Vikas Yadav’s plea for three weeks’ furlough, finding no arbitrariness or violation of constitutional rights in the Director General of Prisons’ decision to deny release, and noting the gravity of the offence, the absence of required annual conduct reports, and objections by the victim’s family. Yadav challenged that decision in the Supreme Court.
Hearing Before Supreme Court:
At today’s hearing, Senior Advocate S Gurukrishna Kumar, appearing for Yadav, told the top court that his client has undergone 23-and-a-half years in custody and had earlier been granted interim bail on several occasions, including for his mother’s medical treatment and for his marriage.
He added that the Court had previously indicated Yadav could seek furlough from authorities and challenge any adverse decision in the High Court.
Kumar said,
“I have one request. In the earlier round, when interim bail was granted, I got married on 5th September. Now Holi is approaching. I am seeking two to three days of interim furlough,”
The complainant’s counsel, Advocate Vrinda Bhandari, argued that Yadav was not eligible for furlough under the Delhi Prison Rules and that the decision to refuse furlough did not merit interference. She also suggested that, if the Court were to grant relief, it should direct Yadav to surrender when the Court reconvenes to prevent repeated extension requests.
FOLLOW US FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES ON YOUTUBE