Supreme Court asks Madhya Pradesh government to pay ₹25 lakh to convict for over 4 years in jail beyond term
At the beginning of August 22, the Supreme Court issued a statement within two weeks in search of an explanation within two weeks by asking how such a serious jump took place and why the petition was in prison for more than 8 years after being sentenced to seven years of imprisonment ”| Photo Loan: Hindu
On Monday, September 8, 2025, the Madhya Pradesh government directed the government to pay 25 lakh compensation to a rape prisoner who has been in prison for more than four years beyond seven years of imprisonment.
JB Pardiwala and KV Viswanathan asked the state officials to compensate for an extra time in prison, causing the long -term imprisonment of Sohan Singh Yadav, who lives in the Sagar Region.
Mr. Yadav was sentenced to life imprisonment in a rape case in 2004 by a session court in the Kharai of Sagar Region in July 2005.
Mr. Yadav objected to the sub -court’s decision before the Madhya Pradesh Supreme Court, who approved his conviction in October 2017 but sentenced his sentence to seven years of meticulous imprisonment.
However, Mr. Yadav was released from Sagar Central prison on June 6 this year.
Following his release, Mr. Nazki, who learned the case through the Supreme Court Legal Services Committee, opened a special leave petition (guilty) before the Supreme Court on behalf of Mr. Yadav on 23 July and sought a monetary compensation for him and led an independent investigation on the issue.
At the beginning of August 22, the Supreme Court sought an explanation by seeking a statement within two weeks, asking “how such a serious jump took place and why the petition was in prison for more than 8 years after being sentenced to seven years of imprisonment”.
At the 8th of September hearing, lawyer Nachiketa Joshi, who appeared for Madhya Pradesh, reported that the prisoner spent some time on bail and brought the real excessive prison time to 4.7 years.
While talking HinduMr. Nazki said that while releasing instructions for compensation, the court expressed discontent from the state for his “misleading statements” on this issue.
“In a declaration, they claimed that the modified sentence did not receive the order to suspend. However, the additional declaration is uncertain as to whether or not the order was taken and they blame in administrative and postal tours,” he added.
The Supreme Court also issued instructions to MPSLSA to make an exercise to find similar long -imprisonment cases.
Published – 09 September 2025 03:51
