22 Years in Chains: Delhi HC Frees Rape Convict, Lambasts "Copy-Paste" Remission Rejections

In a powerful endorsement of reformative justice, the Delhi High Court has ordered the immediate premature release of Rajab Ali @ Babloo, a life convict serving time for the 2003 rape of a 3.5-year-old girl. Justice Neena Bansal Krishna ruled that the Sentence Review Board's (SRB) tenth rejection—despite Ali's exemplary jail record and 22 years of actual incarceration—was "arbitrary, irrational, and contrary" to remission policies. Currently in semi-open jail at Tihar as a cleaner/sweeper, Ali's case highlights the tension between retribution and rehabilitation.

A Crime in 2003, a Lifetime in Question

Rajab Ali was arrested on January 26, 2003, following FIR No. 216/2003 at PS Gandhi Nagar under Section 376 IPC for raping a toddler on January 21. Convicted by ASJ Delhi on December 21, 2005, he received life imprisonment. His appeal was dismissed by the High Court in 2010, and an SLP in the Supreme Court also failed, finalizing the sentence.

Eligible for remission after 10 years' actual jail under the 2004 Remission Policy (prompted by NHRC guidelines), Ali's first SRB consideration came in 2016—three years late. Over 10 meetings till 2024, rejections piled up, citing the offence's "heinousness," police opposition, victim family threats (early claims), and public confidence. Despite positive nods from probation officers and social welfare, Ali languished, amassing 22 years, 5 months actual custody (28+ with remission) by mid-2025.

Petitioner's Plea: "I've Changed—Look Beyond My Past"

Ali, represented by Vrinda Bhandari and team, argued his transformation: shifted to semi-open jail (Tihar, 2017; Mandoli, 2018), recommended for open jail (2019), 22 furloughs, 3 paroles (including COVID emergency releases till 2021), and roles like welder, langar worker, and e-rickshaw driver on parole. Certificates for yoga and good conduct underscored his "excellent" record. He slammed SRB's "mechanical" focus on crime gravity, ignoring Delhi Prison Rules 2018 (DPR)—requiring assessment of propensity loss, family needs (dead parents, disabled sibling), and rehab potential. Citing Joseph v. State of Kerala (2023 INSC 843) for liberal policies and Vijay Kumar Shukla (2024 SCC OnLine Del 7805) for reasoned orders, he urged quashing the latest SRB minutes (Aug/Sep 2024).

State's Stand: "Heinous Crime Trumps All"

The State (NCT Delhi) and DG Prisons countered that SRB's repeated, valid rejections—gravity, police opposition, societal shock—aligned with executive discretion under Sections 432/433 CrPC. Invoking State of Haryana v. Jagdish (2010) 4 SCC 216 for applying 2004 policy, and cases like Union of India v. V. Sriharan (2016) limiting judicial overreach, they deemed courts able only to direct reconsideration, not release. Jail conduct was "satisfactory," but not enough against the minor victim's age and "perversity."

Court Cuts Through the Repetition: Reformation Over Retribution

Justice Krishna dissected SRB's "copy-paste" reasoning, noting identical grounds across 10 meetings despite evolving facts like Ali's semi-open status. Drawing from Narottam Singh v. State of Punjab (1979) 4 SCC 505 and Jagdish , she affirmed punishment's goal as rehab, not vengeance. DPR Rules 1321-1326 demand "excellent conduct" for semi-open/open jails—Ali met them since 2017, with no breaches on releases.

Precedents like Satish @ Sabbe (SLP CRL 8326/2019) and Joseph rejected age-based or gravity-sole propensity assessments; Shor v. State of UP (2021) 14 SCC 820 criticized "myopic" views ignoring post-conviction behavior. SRB flouted Rule 1257(c)—no rejection "merely" on police non-recommendation—and overlooked positive reports from probation/social welfare.

News reports echoed this: Ali's paroles showed no recidivism, reinforcing trust via jail placements.

"The Petitioner being in Semi-Open Jail since 04.09.2017, clearly spells the completely reformed conduct of the Petitioner who has displayed good character, devotion and diligence... There could not have been better evidence of he being fully reformed in his character and disposition."

Public sentiment fears were dismissed as "prejudicial," violating Article 14 equality.

Pivotal Quotes That Seal the Verdict

  • On SRB's Flaw : "The repeated rejection on the ground of heinousness or gravity, is completely misplaced and against the principles formulated in the remission policy."
  • Propensity Lost : "Having spent 22 years of actual incarceration... with no adverse comment, coupled with the Petitioner being shifted to Semi-Open... clearly reflects that there is nil propensity to commit the offence."
  • Judicial Role : "His continued detention... directly impacts his Right to Life and Personal Liberty under Article 21."

Forthwith Freedom: A Precedent for Reform

The court quashed SRB minutes (30.08.2024/19.09.2024), directing Ali's release unless needed elsewhere. This isn't just liberty for one—it's a rebuke to rote rejections, mandating balanced, reasoned SRB decisions weighing jail evolution against past sins. Future boards must heed: gravity qualifies time served, but reformation unlocks the gates. For lifers in semi-open facilities with clean slates, this signals real hope amid penology's shift to humanity.