The Delhi High Court has held that the possibility of a premature release sending a “wrong” or “negative” message to society against the justice system, as well as baseless or unsubstantiated apprehensions expressed by victims or witnesses, cannot be treated as relevant factors while deciding a convict's plea for premature release. The Court made the observation while dealing with the pleas of two life convicts, Ramesh and Tasleem, seeking premature release after repeated rejections by the Sentence Review Board (SRB). The Court, after examining the statutory framework, the 2004 Guidelines, the Delhi Prison Rules and precedents on remission, set out the governing principles for premature release. If they were treated as decisive, the very possibility of premature release would effectively be eliminated. His plea for premature release had been repeatedly rejected, and the Court found the SRB's approach inconsistent with the State's own policy.