BALDEV SINGH Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THROUGH this criminal misc. petition filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, read with Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India, Baldev Singh has prayed for issuance of a direction to the respondents to release him pre-maturely as his further detention in jail is violative of Articles 14, 16, 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India. It is alleged that he was sentenced to imprisonment for life and a fine of Rs. 1,000/- by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Hisar, vide order dated 27.3.1991, under Section 302/149 and further to undergo imprisonment for one year Section 449 of the Indian Penal Code and in default of payment of fine to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for six months.

(2.) THE appeal filed by the appellant against the order of sentence and conviction was dismissed by this court some time in October, 1992. He has all along been in custody since the date of his arrest and was never released on bail. He remained in jail as an under-trial for four months. He has been in jail since 26.3.1991. He has been granted remissions by the Government as well as by the Jail authorities to the tune of four years. His period of detention is thus 13 years 8 months and 10 days. After he was sentenced, he was granted parole and furlough on a number of occasions. He was always found to be of good conduct during the period of temporary release. He always surrendered in jail after the period of parole/furlough without any demur. It is alleged that he moved the authorities for the grant of mercy under Article 161 of the Constitution of India (copy Annexure P2). In the mercy petition, he enumerated various grounds warranting the grant of mercy to him. It is alleged that at the time of conviction, he was 68 years old. Now, he is 77/78 years old. He is not maintaining proper health. He is not in a capacity due to old age to commit any offence. He is incapable of looking after him in jail. It is alleged that he has spent almost 10 years (actual) in jail, after conviction. He is suffering from hypertension, diabetes, weak eye-sight and general weakness. To him, the instructions dated 4.2.1993 (Annexure P-3) issued by the Government are applicable so far as his pre-mature release is concerned. As per 1993 instructions, handicapped convict is entitled to the consideration of his case after he had undergone detention for a period of six years, provided the handicap is of such a nature so to render him totally incapable of committing any offence and further even looking after himself in the prison.

(3.) THE respondent-State of Haryana contested this petition urging that the petitioner is undergoing imprisonment for life under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code. He cannot claim pre-mature release as a matter of right as sentence for life is sentence for the whole of the remaining period of life unless remitted by the State Government in exercise of the powers conferred by Articles 72/161 of the Constitution of India because the State Government has liberalised the policy regarding pre-mature release of the convicts and as such he cannot claim his release prematurely because it is only a concession given by the State Government after considering the behaviour of the convict inside the jail and the gravity of the offence and the manner and the circumstances under which the crime was committed. So far as the remission of the remaining portion of the sentence of the convict through a written order under Section 432 Cr.P.C. is concerned, he had earlier filed Criminal Misc. No. 26944-M of 1997 wherein he had prayed for directions to the State of Haryana to release him prematurely in view of Government instructions dated 4.2.1993. The said Criminal Misc. was dismissed by this Court on 31.3.1998. He has undergone 12 years one month and 20 days total sentence including under trial period and the remissions minus parole period as on 18.9.2000. The split up of the sentence is as under :-