Updated: Di, 09 Sep 2025 03:16 am (IST) The Supreme Court ordered the Madhya Pradesh government to give a remuneration of Rs 25 Lakh to a person named Sohan Singh, who, despite completing his sentence, spent about five years in prison. The court considers it a serious violation of the fundamental right to personal freedom. The court also ordered constitutional authority to identify it. Digital Desk, New -Delhi. The Supreme Court on Monday ordered the Madhya Pradesh government to give a remuneration of Rs 25 Lakh to the person who spent about five years in prison, despite completing his entire sentence. Remove ad, just read the news, this case is from Sohan Singh alias Bablu, who was charged in Khurai in the Sagar district in 2004 before the Sessions Judge Arts 376 (rape), 450 (infiltration in the home) and 506-B (criminal threats). He was sentenced to life imprisonment, as well as a fine of Rs 2,000. The challenge given in the MP Supreme Court was disputed in the Madhya Pradesh High Court. In October 2007, the Supreme Court partially accepted its appeal and revised the sentence. The Supreme Court said: “Given all the circumstances and the evidence available on the records, it would be appropriate that the punishment given by the trial court should be done seven years.” However, despite the decline in sentence, Sohan Singh had to remain in jail for another 4.7 years. He was released late on bail despite completing his entire sentence. What did the Supreme Court say? When the case reached the Supreme Court, a Bank of Justice JB Pardiwala and Justice KV Vishwanathan said the facts of the case were quite shocking. We want to know how such a serious decline has occurred? The court gave it to the Madhya Pradesh government for two weeks. The bank also said that Sohan Singh’s illegal surveillance is a serious offense of the fundamental right to his personal freedom. Therefore, the Supreme Court ordered the Madhya Pradesh government to compensate the victim of Rs 25 Lakh. In addition, the Madhya Pradesh State Legal Services Authority was asked to identify if there are other prisoners who are in custody for more than their sentence. (With the input of the IANS news agency) also read ‘Singham’s memory of Singham’, why did the Supreme Court comment on the shooting at the Maharashtra police station
-
-
-
-
