Telangana High Court had set aside the State government’s decision rejecting the representation of a life convict S. K. Zakaria, who was in jail for over 24 years, for release on mercy grounds.
Justice Lalitha Kanneganti of the HC, who heard the writ petition filed by the life convict’s family, directed the State government to consider Zakaria’s case in the light of Supreme Court verdicts of similar nature. Closing the writ petition, the judge said the government should take a call on the life convict’s representation within three weeks.
In 1997, Zakaria was arrested on charge of murdering M. A. Khadeer, deputy secretary of the then Andhra Pradesh State Waqf Board. Six years later, the Fourth Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge of Hyderabad sentenced Zakaria to undergo life imprisonment holding him guilty in the homicide case.
Zakaria’s appeal petition, along with that of the other accused in the murder case, was dismissed in 2003 by the HC. Since then, he was languishing in prison. In 2010, Ranga Reddy District Probation Officer recommended to the government that the life convict may be released on mercy grounds since his conduct in jail was good.
In 2016, the life convict filed a writ petition in HC seeking freedom from prison. The HC passed an order giving liberty to Zakaria to give representation to the government for his release as per the provisions of GO Ms. no. 16 of 2016. The HC also directed the authorities to take a call on the representation within a month.
Three years later, the government turned down the life convict’s representation observing that he was convicted for murdering a public servant on duty and hence not entitled for release. The life convict moved the HC again in 2019. This time, the HC allowed the writ petition instructing the government to reconsider the petitioner’s representation for release.
The HC, in that order, observed that the public servant (murder victim) ‘was not on duty’ at the time of his murder since it was committed around 9.30 p.m. However, the government declined to set him free stating that his case came under the category of ‘killing a public servant on duty’.
Justice Lalita Kanneganti noted that it appeared the rejection order was issued ‘without application of mind’ and it was in clear violation of the orders passed earlier by this court.
