BHARAT Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this petition under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has assailed the legality and validity of the orders Annexure-P/11 & P/12 whereby the Hon'ble Governor of Chhattisgarh has pardoned respondents 5 & 6 in exercise of powers under Article 161 of the Constitution of India and has directed their release from jail.

(2.) Facts of the case, briefly stated, are that respondents 5 & 6 along with several other accused persons were tried for committing offences under Sections 147 and 302 read with Section 149 of the IPC for committing murder of deceased Hanua at 8.30 am on 11th July, 1975. The trial Court acquitted Arjun, Bhikham, Nanku and Parethan. Respondents 5 & 6 along with some other accused persons were convicted by the trial Court and the said conviction was affirmed by the High Court. The Supreme Court, by judgment dated 5.10.1990 in Cr.A. No.168/79,allowed the appeal and set aside the conviction and sentence of all other accused except respondents 5 & 6, Baran and Karan. Thus, out of 19 accused persons only 4 stood convicted. When respondents 5 & 6 were undergoing the jail sentence, an application for pardon was moved before the Hon'ble Governor and the same has been allowed by the impugned order.

(3.) The petitioner happens to be the son of the deceased. It is argued on his behalf that the sentence of life imprisonment wound mean that the convict shall remain in jail for his entire life, therefore, his release by granting remission or pardon is contrary to the settled legal position. Learned counsel would refer to the provisions contained in Section 433-A of the CrPC and the law laid down by the Supreme Court in Maru Ram Vs. Union of India and others, 1981 1 SCC 107, Kehar Singh and another Vs. Union of India and another, 1989 1 SCC 204, Swaran Singh Vs. State of U.P. and others, 1998 4 SCC 75.