SHABBUDDIN PANNUNIA Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is at present undergoing sentence at Sabarmati Central Prison, Ahmedabad. He has been convicted for the offences punishable under Ss. 147,148,149, 324 and 326 read with S. 149, Penal Code. For the offence punishable under Ss.147 and 148, Penal Code, he has been sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for one year and two years respectively. For the offence punishable under S. 324 he has been sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for one year' and for the offences punishable under Ss.326 and 149, Penal Code, he is sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for five years each. All the substantive sentences have been ordered to run concurrently.

(2.) On Mar. 6,1984, the Home Department of the State of Gujarat issued a general order in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-s.(1) of S. 432, Criminal P.C. whereby remissions have been granted to certain categories of prisoners who have been sentenced in the State of Gujarat. As per the said Order, the prisoners with sentence above 4 years but up to 6 years are granted remission of 40 days; and the prisoners with sentence above 10 years are granted remission of 75 days. The case of the petitioner is that if all the sentences awarded to him are taken into consideration, then it can be said that he has been sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 14 years; and in that case, he is entitled to a remission of 75 days. It is also his case that in view of other remissions which he has earned so far, he ought to have been released on 23-11-1984. The respondents by not granting him full remission of 75 days have acted illegally; and, therefore, this Court by issuing a writ of mandamus should direct them to grant full remission of 75 days and to release him from jail forthwith.

(3.) The statements made in the petition with respect to the remissions earned by the petitioner are denied by the respondents. But really we are not concerned with those denials; and, therefore, we do not think it necessary to refer to them. Only question which arises for our consideration is whether the petitioner is entitled to a remission of 75 days or 40 days only. Relevant part of the aforesaid Order of the State Government reads as under :