VIJAY KUMAR Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Vijay Kumar, a detainee in the Borstal Institute and Juvenile Jail, Faridkot, preferred an application to M. R. Sharma, J., which is the subject matter of the present criminal writ petition. He stated therein that he was awarded life imprisonment, but on writ petition, this Court on 22-8-1980 applied the provisions of the East Punjab Children Act, 1949 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) to him and as such he should be released on the parity of the case relating to Kashmir Singh, ordered to be released by S. S. Dewan, J., on the attainment of age of 20 years. With the aid of the record as available in this Court, and as placed before me for perusal by the learned counsel for the State, the following facts emerge.

(2.) The petitioner was accused of offence under Section 302, Indian Penal Code. The Court of Session, Amritsar convicted him on November 14, 1977 of the said offence and sentenced him to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 3,000/-. He was also convicted under the Arms Act and his sentence thereunder was ordered to run concurrently with the life imprisonment. The appeal preferred by him was dismissed by a Division Bench of this Court. It, however, appears that the counsel appearing for the petitioner in the appeal did not claim any relief under the provisions of the Act and the matter remained unraked. The petitioner then filed a criminal writ petition No. 109 of 1980 in this Court. S. S. Sidhu, J. on 22-9-1980 took notice of the above said facts and ordered as follows:

(3.) In furtherance of the order of this Court the Governor of Punjab on 26-9-1980, passed an order under section 34(2) of the Act directing that the petitioner undergoing imprisonment in Central Jail be transferred and detained in Borstal Institute arid Juvenile Jail to be kept separate from other prisoners and hardened criminals till he attains the age of 21. The petitioner, having been transferred to the Borstal Jail has now preferred the present criminal writ petition No. 276 of 1982 on the ground that another boy detained with him, named Kashmir Singh, has been ordered to be released on the attainment of 20 years of age. Taking cue of that example, he has pressed for the same relief.