R/SCR.A/4815/2025 ORDER DATED: 09/10/2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION (DIRECTION) NO. 4815 of 2025 ========================================================== NIZAM @ NAZIR ABUBHAI SUMRA Versus STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS. ========================================================== Appearance: BHAVIN B THAKAR(9371) for the Applicant(s) No. 1 NOTICE NOT RECD BACK for the Respondent(s) No. 2 NOTICE SERVED for the Respondent(s) No. 3,4,5 MR HARDIK MEHTA, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1 ========================================================== CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HASMUKH D. SUTHAR Date : 09/10/2025 ORAL ORDER 1. RULE returnable forthwith. Learned APP waives service of notice of Rule for and on behalf of respondent No.1 – State of Gujarat. 2. With the consent of learned counsel appearing for respective parties, present petition is taken up for final hearing today. 3. By way of present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India read with Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short “Cr.P.C”), the petitioner has prayed to quash and set aside the impugned order/s passed by the Department of Home, Government of Gujarat, whereby the petitioner has been denied remission under Section 432 of the CrPC and thereby, be pleased to release the petitioner from jail as he is in jail since more than 25 years. 4. At the outset, learned Public Prosecutor upon instructions from Deputy Secretary, Home Department, has fairly submitted that as per the directions issued by this Court, order/s of remission or refusal of remission have been passed following the directions given by this Court and time to time directions issued by the Hon’ble Supreme Court and therefore, without entering into merit of the matters, the R/SCR.A/4815/2025 ORDER DATED: 09/10/2025 State Authority once again is ready and willing to reconsider the matters on merit, as expeditiously as possible. 5. From the record of these petition, it appears that remission orders passed without assigning any reason and general order which does not reflect application of mind and proper consideration of case of convicts have been passed by the authority without verifying the facts of each case. In view of the above, prima facie, it appears that the respondent authority has not considered the application/s filed by the present petitioner/s in a fair manner and not properly assessed the material and the opinion produced before the authority. 6. Herein, as discussed above, the report of Jail Advisory Board is ambiguous and there is nothing in the said report which clearly indicate about the conduct and relevant criteria to consider the applications for remission. 7. Same time, as this Court is unable to sit in appeal or review the decision of the respondent Authority including the calculation of days and hence, the impugned order/s passed by the Authority deserve to be quashed and set aside and the matters are required to be remitted back to the respondent Authority to decide afresh, in light of prevailing government policy and Resolutions extending benefit of remission as well as the criteria laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Nawas @ Mulanavas Vs. State of Kerala, reported in 2024 INSC 215; (a) the number of deceased who are victims of that crime and their age and gender; (b) the nature of injuries including sexual assault if any; (c) the motive for which the offence was committed; (d) whether the offence was committed when the convict was on bail in another case; (e) the premeditated nature of the offence; (f) the relationship between the offender and the victim; (g) the abuse of trust if any; (h) the criminal antecedents; and R/SCR.A/4815/2025 ORDER DATED: 09/10/2025 whether the convict, if released, would be a menace to the society. Some of the positive factors have been, (1) age of the convict; (2) the probability of reformation of convict; (3) the convict not being a professional killer; (4) the socio-economic condition of the accused; (5) the composition of the family of the accused and (6) conduct expressing remorse.” 8. In view of the aforesaid discussion, the impugned order passed by the Department of Home, Government of Gujarat, are hereby quashed and set aside. The matter is remitted to the concerned authority for fresh consideration, which shall be completed within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of this order, without being influenced by any of the observations made herein. 9. Meanwhile, the petitioner is hereby released on parole leave for a period of two (2) weeks on usual terms and conditions including furnishing a bail bond of Rs.5,000/- to the satisfaction of the concerned jail authority, pending re-consideration of application by the concerned authority. The petitioner shall surrender before the jail authority without fail. No further extension shall be granted. 10.With the above observation and direction, present petition along with allied application stand disposed of. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent. Direct Service is permitted. (HASMUKH D. SUTHAR,J) SUCHIT Original copy of this order has been signed by the Hon'ble Judge. Digitally signed by: PATEL SUCHIT JAYESHBHAI(HC01083), Private Secretary, at High Court of Gujarat on 09/10/2025 18:10:33