AVTAR SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS petition filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 read with Article 226 of the Constitution of India prays for issuance of an order or direction to release the petitioner pre-maturely by extending him the benefit of instructions dated 13.4.2001 claiming that he has completed more than 8 years of actual sentence and with remissions more than 13 years sentence. The case of the petitioner had been rejected by the respondents on 9.10.2001 (Annexure P.4) on the ground that the instructions dated 13.4.2001 do not apply to his case because the petitioner is guilty of pre-planned ghastly and brutal murder of his wife and would be covered by exception to clause (vi) of the instructions.

(2.) BRIEF facts of the case are that the petitioner was convicted under Sections 302 IPC in case FIR No. 209 dated 27.7.1992 P.S. Sadar, Patiala for committing the murder of his wife Kulwant Kaur. Learned Sessions Judge vide his judgment dated 4.11.1993 had convicted him by holding that the petitioner chopped off the head of his wife from body. The petitioner was awarded life imprisonment. It is appropriate to mention that he was arrested on 9.8.1992. His total period of sentence as an under-trial or after conviction is as under : Years Mon Days Period Spent in detention before and conviction from 9.8.92 to 4.11.1993 and 4.11.1993 to 13.4.2001. 8 7 29 Remissions granted by the Govt. as well as Jail Authorities 8 0 0 16 07 29

(3.) THE case set up by the petitioner is that the State of Punjab has issued instructions under Article 161 of the Constitution on 13.4.2001 and according to clause (i) of the afore-mentioned instructions, the petitioner is entitled to be released pre-maturely after he has completed more than 8 years actual sentence which with remission comes to more than 13 years. Those instructions have been issued to commemorate the Bicentenary celebrations of the Coronation of Maharaja Ranjit Singh and the respondent-State had ordered to remit the unexpired portion of sentence of imprisonment for life and to grant special remission to the prisoners. On the strength of the afore-mentioned instructions, the petitioner filed an application claiming his pre-mature release. However, the same has been rejected by the respondents on 9.10.2001 (Annexure P.4).