VIRENDER NATH Vs. STATEDELHI ADMINISTRATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a petition filed by Virender Nath seeking directions to the State to release him prematurely on the plea that he was only 17 years of age at the time of commission of offence, i.e., 29th March, 1978. After trial he was convicted by Shri T.S. Oberoi, Addl. Sessions Judge, Delhi for an offence under Section 302, Indian Penal Code and sentenced to imprisonment for life vide judgment dated the 31st January, 1981. According to him he has already undergone 12 years of imprisoment on including the period of remissions and, therefore, as per sub-para (b) of paragraph 516-B of the Punjab Jail Manual, he ought to have been released after he had undergone sentence of ten years including remissions. That sub-para reads as under : "Action to be taken on expiry of 10 years-(b)

(2.) The case of a famale prisoner and of a male prisoner under 20 years of age at the time of commission of offence who is undergoing : (i) Imprisonment/s for life; (ii) Imprisonment/s for life and a terms of imprisonment. 245 (iii) Commulative periods of Rigorous imprisonment aggregating to more than 10 years; or (iv) A single sentence of more than 20 years shall be submitted through the Inspector General of Prisons, Punjab, for the orders of the State Government when the prisoner has undergone a period of detention in jail amounting together with remission earnd to 10 years. (v) Notwithstanding anything contained above, a Superintendent, Jail may, in his discretion, refer at any time for the orders of the State Government through the Inspector General of Prisoners, Punjab, the case of any prisoners sentenced to imprisonment for life whose sentence might in the Superintendent's opinion be suitably commuted into a term of imprisonment."

(3.) By way of return to the rule nisi issued, the Superintendent of Central Jail No. 3 Tihar, Shri Akash Mahapatra has averred that the case of the petitioner was submitted to the Sentence Revising Board by him on 8th June, 1987. But it was returned to him on 18th June, 1987 with the following remarks: "The commutation roll of the above named convict furnished to us by Jail No. 3 has been duly scrutinised and it has been observed that the said convict had been convicted after 18.12.78. In accordance with the present law he has normally, to complete 14 years of actual imprisonment before his case can be placed before the Sentence Revising Board for consideration of his premature release. His commutation roll is, therefore, returned herewith, since he is not yet eligible for the premature release."