GURCHARAN SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner was convicted by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Barnala, for an offence under Section 302 Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo life imprisonment vide his order dated 17-1-1975. His case for premature release under para 516 (b) of Punjab Jail Manual read with instructions dated 12-5-1977 of the State of Punjab was deferred by the State Government for one year. The petitioner then filed Criminal Writ Petition No. 201 of 1983 wherein this Court directed the State to reconsider the case of the petitioner for premature release in accordance with law. The State Government, after reconsidering the case, rejected it on January 10, 1986. The petitioner then filed another Criminal Writ Petition No. 265 of 1986 wherein the State Government was directed to reconsider the case of the petitioner and decide it by passing a speaking order. However, the State Government again rejected the case of premature release of the petitioner on 23-4-1987. The petitioner again filed another Criminal Writ Petition No. 769 of 1987 wherein vide order dated 3-9-1987 the State Government was directed to pass a fresh order after giving notice and opportunity of hearing to the detenu. Accordingly, the State Government, after affording opportunity to the detenu, rejected his case on 2-3-1988. During the pendency of these Criminal Writ Petitions, the petitioner remained on bail from 6-1-1984 to 12-10-1988. He surrendered to the authorities thereafter.

(2.) THE petitioner has again come up before this Court through this petition contending that he has already suffered 11 years of actual sentence besides earning remission to the tune of 10 years 2 months and 9 days. In return, all these facts are admitted by the State-respondent but it is maintained that the concession of premature release to the petitioner was rightly withheld as the petitioner had committed seven jail offences prior to 6-1-1984. It is further maintained that after the surrender of the petitioner in jail, the Inspector General, Prisons has again initiated a fresh case for premature release of the petitioner and report of the District Level Authorities has since been called.

(3.) IT is not disputed that according to the relevant instructions, the State Government has to consider case of premature release of the life convict if he has undergone 8-1/2years of Actual sentence and 14 years including remissions. It appears that the State Government has withheld this concession of grant of premature release to the petitioner only on the ground that he his committed some jail offences prior to 6-1-1984.