STATE OF HARYANA Vs. MOHINDER SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Leave granted.

(2.) In five of the appeals (arising from SLP (Cri) Nos. 1810/99, 145/2000, 1812/99, 2033-34/99 and 2151/99) out of the batch of six questions involved is if the respondent, a convict, is entitled to remission of his sentence for the period during which he is on bail. In the sixth appeal (arising from SLP (Cri) 643/99) question is if the prisoner, who is convicted of an offence under Section 376 of Indian Penal Code (IPC), though confined in jail, is entitled to remission of his sentence when the Government circular issued under Section 432 of the Code of Criminal Procedure ('Code' for short) does not grant such remission to an inmate who has been convicted under Section 376, I. P. C.

(3.) High Court in batch of five appeals observed that conviction and sentence are two separate terms and that the moment a person is convicted he becomes stigmatic. High Court said that at that point of time he is a convict and if he has been granted bail by the appellate Court it is by virtue of provision of Section 389 of the Code and his sentence stands suspended and not that his conviction is suspended and that with the dismissal of appeal of such convict stigma of conviction is not wiped off. High Court was, therefore, of the opinion that such a convict would be entitled to remission for the period he was on bail when the circular gave the benefit of remission to a prisoner on parole/furlough. High Court gave direction to the State Government to reconsider the case of the convict who, it said, should be entitled to the remission as per the circular during the period he was on bail.