KAIL SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB, ANR.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE true nature of the sentence of 'Imprisonment for Life' prescribed for heinous offences either independently or as an alternative to the death penalty by the Indian Penal Code -and in particular, whether the imprisonment thereunder is to be rigorous or simple -is the pristinely legal question which has necessitated this reference to the Division Bench.

(2.) THE factual matrix is both brief and undisputed. The Petitioner was arrested on the charge of murder on May 25, 1972 and later convicted thereunder by the Court of Sessions at Jullundur and sentenced to Imprisonment for life on January 31, 1973. This conviction and the sentence were up -held by the High Court on appeal. It is averred that the Petitioner was obliged to undergo rigorous imprisonment throughout his detention in various jails in the State of Punjab including the open -air jail at Nabha It is claimed that on account of his good work and conduct the Petitioner has earned remissions both under the statutory rules (sic) by the orders of the State Government under Article 161 of the Constitution of India or Section 432 of the Code of Criminal Procedure with the result that the total sentence including the a(sic) imprisonment and remissions now undergone by him is (sic) sixteen years.

(3.) WHEN the matter first came up before my. learned brother Bains, J. sitting singly, he noticed in his referring" order that the following two significant questions fell for determination: