Sukhdev Yadav @ Pehalwan vs The State Of (Nct Of Delhi) on 22 April, 2025

Supreme Court – Daily Orders

Sukhdev Yadav @ Pehalwan vs The State Of (Nct Of Delhi) on 22 April, 2025

Author: Abhay S. Oka

Bench: Abhay S. Oka

     ITEM NO.5                         COURT NO.4                  SECTION II-C

                              S U P R E M E C O U R T O F     I N D I A
                                      RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

        PETITION(S) FOR SPECIAL LEAVE TO APPEAL (CRL.)             NO(S).   17915/2024

     [Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 25-11-2024
     in WPCRL No. 1682/2023 passed by the High Court of Delhi at New
     Delhi]

     SUKHDEV YADAV @ PEHALWAN                                        Petitioner(s)

                                                VERSUS

     THE STATE OF (NCT OF DELHI) & ORS.                              Respondent(s)

     [TO BE TAKEN UP IN FIRST FIVE CASES]
     (IA Nos.28978/2025, 48540/2025 and 54824/2025 - PERMISSION TO FILE
     ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES)

     Date : 22-04-2025 This matter was called on for hearing today.

     CORAM :
                         HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ABHAY S. OKA
                         HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE UJJAL BHUYAN

     For Petitioner(s):            Mr. Siddharth Mridul, Sr. Adv.
                                   Mr. Hemendra Jailia, Adv.
                                   Ms. Madhurima Mridul, Adv.
                                       Minnatullah, Adv.
                                   Mr. Sanjay Baranwal, Adv.
                                   Mr. Hemant Gulati, Adv.
                                   Mr. Aditya Gulati, Adv.
                                   Mr. Milind Kumar, AOR

     For Respondent(s):            Mrs. Archana Pathak Dave, A.S.G.
                                   Mr. Mukesh Kumar Maroria, AOR
                                   Mr. Rajan Kumar Chourasia, Adv.
                                   Ms. Sweksha, Adv.
                                   Ms. Priyanka Terdal, Adv.
                                   Ms. Harshita Choubey, Adv.
                                   Mr. Jagdish Chandra, Adv.

                                   Ms. Aparajita Singh, Sr. Adv.
                                   Ms. Vrinda Bhandari, AOR
Signature Not Verified
                                   Ms. Pragya Barsaiyan, Adv.
Digitally signed by
ASHISH KONDLE
Date: 2025.04.25
                                   Ms. Anandita Rana, Adv.
                                   Ms. Vanshita Gupta, Adv.
13:31:37 IST
Reason:




                                                 1
            Mr. Sanchar Anand, Adv.
            Mr. Apoorva Singhal, AOR
            Mr. Shiv Kumar, Adv.
            Mr. Aman Kumar Thakur, Adv.
            Mr. Abhishek Bhardwaj, Adv.

  UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
                     O R D E R

We started hearing this matter around 2:30 p.m. The

order dated 24th February, 2025 passed by this Court reads

thus:

“We have perused the judgment of the High Court
dated 6th February, 2025 in Criminal Appeal No.145 of
2012. As regards the sentence awarded to the
petitioner, in paragraph 881 of the operative part
of the judgment, it is stated thus:

“Life imprisonment which shall be 20 years
of actual imprisonment without
consideration of remission, and fine of
Rs.10,000/-.”

The learned Additional Solicitor General
appearing for the respondent State of Delhi states
that even after completion of 20 years of actual
imprisonment, the State Government will not release
the petitioner, notwithstanding what is stated in
paragraph 881 of the judgment of the High Court
which has attained finality.

We direct the Secretary of the Home Department
of the State of NCT of Delhi to file an affidavit
making a statement on oath on the question whether
after completing 20 years of actual sentence, the
petitioner will be released. An affidavit to be
filed by 28th February, 2025.

List on 3rd March, 2025.”

(underlines supplied)

The order dated 28th March, 2025 reads thus:

“For considering the issue whether the
petitioner is entitled to be released on completion
of actual 20 years of incarceration, list on 22 nd
April, 2025 in first five cases.

As regards the decision of the Sentence Review
Board, we permit the petitioner to challenge the
same substantively.

We have seen in several cases concerning the
grant of remission that either the assurances given
on behalf of the Delhi Government are not complied

2
with or the orders of this Court are not complied
with. For the time being, we accept the apology
tendered by the Secretary.”
(underlines supplied)

Though above two orders gave a clear notice to all the

learned counsel appearing for the parties that this Court

was to consider the interpretation of the operative part of

the judgment of the High Court in paragraph 881. The

reason is that this Court has a duty to uphold liberty

under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. The

relevant part of paragraph 881 reads thus:

“881 …

             (I)
              For commission     Sentences  awarded Sentence awarded to
              of offences        to each of Vikas Sukhdev Yadav
              under              Yadav    &  Vishal
                                 Yadav
             Section 302/34      Life    imprisonment Life    imprisonment
             IPC                 which shall be 25 which shall be 20
                                 years    of   actual years    of   actual
                                 imprisonment         imprisonment
                                 without              without
                                 consideration     of consideration     of

remission, and fine remission and fine
of Rs.50 lakh each of Rs.10,000/-.”

The learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner

completed his submissions. The learned ASG appearing for

the State of NCT of Delhi, after making submissions for

half an hour, raised a preliminary objection that the

petitioner has not raised a plea in this Petition that he

is entitled to be released after undergoing actual sentence

of 20 years. Thus, the submission in short was that this

Court cannot go into this question. As indicated in the

earlier two orders, which we have quoted above, make it

clear that we had put the learned counsel for the parties

3
to the notice that the issue whether the petitioner is

entitled to be released on completion of 20 years of

incarceration will be considered today. While the learned

ASG was arguing, we thought that the Advocates waiting for

other cases should not be made to wait as remaining part of

the day’s time was likely to be consumed in this case.

Therefore, at 3:15 p.m., we discharged the rest of the

cases on the cause list and informed the members of the Bar

that those cases will not be taken up. Fifteen minutes

thereafter, this preliminary objection was raised by the

learned ASG. Therefore, raising such a preliminary

objection after arguing the case for half an hour

especially in the light of the two orders which we have

quoted above, is unfair to the other litigants whose cases

were listed before this Court today. Since this strong

objection has been raised, we permit the petitioner to

amend the Petition for raising the contention noted in the

earlier orders, though this amendment is strictly not

required in view of our earlier orders. We direct the

petitioner to file an amended petition within three days

from today with an advance copy to the learned counsel

representing the respondents.

Counter affidavit, if any, to be filed by 2nd May, 2025.

At this stage, there is an objection raised by the

learned senior counsel appearing for the complainant to the

appearance of the learned senior counsel appearing for the

petitioner. It is for the learned senior counsel for the

4
petitioner to consider the said objection and take

appropriate decision.

List the Petition on 7th May, 2025 in first five cases.

   (ASHISH KONDLE)                                  (AVGV RAMU)
ASTT. REGISTRAR-cum-PS                         COURT MASTER (NSH)




                             5