HC: SRB can’t deny release citing ‘public perception’ in Mattoo case

The Delhi High Court on Thursday observed that the Sentence Review Board (SRB) appeared to have rejected the premature release of Santosh Kumar Singh, who is serving a life sentence for the rape and murder of law student Priyadarshini Mattoo, based on “public perception

The Delhi High Court on Thursday observed that the Sentence Review Board (SRB) appeared to have rejected the premature release of Santosh Kumar Singh, who is serving a life sentence for the rape and murder of law student Priyadarshini Mattoo, based on “public perception.” The court assured that Singh would get an “objective treatment” regarding premature release.

The counsel representing Mattoo’s brother, however, opposed the petition to advance the hearing date, arguing that the offence committed by Singh was grave (Photo for representation)

A bench of Justice Anup Jairam Bhambhani said that while the offence was undeniably heinous and the victim’s family had suffered an irreparable loss, the SRB was just rejecting premature release petitions of convicts, including Singh, on account of the heinousness of the offence despite receiving recommendations on the contrary.

“SRB seems to be proceeding on public perception. You are a hugely unpopular person...SRB is looking at things like Lady Justice as she originally was, with blindfolds. Your name doesn’t sound good so I am rejecting it,” Justice Bhambhani remarked.

However, the court advanced the hearing from May 18 to April 20, noting that it was already scheduled to consider other matters that day arising from the SRB’s rejection of convicts’ premature release petitions. The court assured Singh that he would get an “objective treatment” regarding premature release.

This followed Singh’s counsel, Mohit Mathur, arguing that the SRB had earlier rejected the plea on similar grounds on November 27 last year. Mathur noted the rejection failed to consider that Singh had spent 31 years in custody, had been lodged in an open jail, and disregarded the high court’s July 2025 ruling setting aside the SRB’s rejection.

The counsel representing Mattoo’s brother, however, opposed the petition to advance the hearing date, arguing that the offence committed by Singh was grave.

Justice Bhambhani further noted that even Sushil Kumar, the convict in the 1995 Tandoor murder case, had been released after spending 23 years in prison.

“There is something called reformation. There is something called 30 years in custody. There is something called transfer to open jail. I understand your sentiments. What he did was unacceptable and the system punished him. He got a life sentence. The offence was heinous. (But) What do we do? We can confine a man like this?” the court observed in its November 2025 order.

Mattoo, 25, was raped and murdered in January 1996. The trial court in December 1999 acquitted Santosh but the Delhi high court overruled the decision in October, 2006, and awarded him the death penalty. In October, 2010, the Supreme Court, while upholding Singh’s conviction, saved him from gallows by commuting death to life imprisonment.