HARBHAJAN SINGH Vs. LT GOVERNOR OF DELHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner Harbhajan Singh, who is undergoing life imprisonment for having committed an offence under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, seeks directions to the Delhi Administration for his forthwith relase from jail as according to him he has already completed over 14 years sentence.

(2.) The facts are that the petitioner was admitted in jail on 19th January 1974 in case, F.I.R. No. 47/74 under section 302,I.P.C. He was tried by the AddI. Sessions Judge, Delhi and was convicted and sentenced to life imprisonment for the offences charged on 14th June 1976. According to the affidavit filed on behalf of the respondents, the petitioner has earned remissions for a period of 3 years 2 months and 4 days as on 30th September 1987. Including the remissions, the total period of sentence be has undergone as on that date is stated to be 15 years 6 months and 29 days. Para 516-B of the Jail Manual lays down the action to be taken by the jail authorities on expiry of 14 years imprisonment. The relevant portion of that paragraph reads as under: 516.B (a) With the exception of females and of males who were under 20 years of age at the time of commission of offence, the cases of every convicted prisoner sentenced to: - (G of I Resolution No. 159-167, dated 6-9-05 and P.G. No.1 8608 Jails, dated 29-6-20).

(3.) The Superintendent Jail acting within the purview of the above provision recommended the case of the petitioner for release. It is averred that his case was considered by the Sentence Revising Board in its meeting held on 25th June, 1987. We may note here that we were informed during arguments that the said Sentence Revising Board has been set up by the Delhi Administration to consider and recommend to cases for pre-mature release to the Administrator of Delhi of all the prisoners who are eligible under the provisions of the Punjab Jail Manual and/or under the provisions of section 432 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The relevant minute of the - Board regarding the case of the petitioner herein has been annexed with the return. It seems the cases was rejected as the copy of the judgment whereby the petitioner had been found guilty, had not been produced. That minute is reproduced below: Minutes of the Meeting of the Sentence Revising Board held on 25.6.87 at 11.30 a.m. in the Chamber of Home Secretary, Delhi Administration Delhi. Harbhajan Singh Bhajji S/o Charan Dass The convict was sentenced .to imprisonment for life on 14.6.76 under section 302 J.P.C. The judgment copy of the Trial Court was not placed before the Board. Therefore, the circumstances in which the murder was committed and motive thereof could not be kdown. The age of the convict at the time of offence was 27 years. The convict has undergone sentence of 14 years, 4 months and 13 days including UT period and remissions as on 30.9.86. The case was earlier put up before the Board on 2.12.85 and was rejected. His name was, however, not included in the Agenda of the last meeting held on 9.7.86. The Superintendent Jail has recommended the Case for premature release and the DCP (West) vide its report dated 12.12.86 has informed that there is no danger to breach of peace but in the absence of the judgment copy, the Board could not unanimously agree to recommend the case for his premature release. The Board express their unhappiness over non-availability of the copy of the judgment. The Board accordingly is of the view that sufficient facts are not yet available to recommend his case for premature relase. (emphasis supplied)