BANWARI Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BANWARI and Ram Sarup were convicted bv the Court of Session in, Hissar on November 12, 1965 under Section 302 read with Section 34, Indian Penal Code, and1 sentenced to life imprisonment each. Criminal Appeal No. 903 of 1965 filed bv them was dismissed by this Court on February 21. 1'967. Since the date of their conviction, thev have been suffering the term of imprisonment. By filing? this petition, thev seek relief under Section 428 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of 1973 (hereinafter referred to as the New Code) which enacts :

(2.) SO far as category No. 3 is concerned, there can be no two opinions that benefit of Section 428 would eo to an accused person. As regards the application of its provisions to the other two categories, the relevant portion of Section 484 of the new Code is:

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioners then placed reliance on a Sinele Bench decision of this Court in Rud Lai v. State of Harvana. (Criminal Writ No. 12 of 1974) decided on April 19. 1974. In that case, lone before the commencement of the new Code, Ram Chander was convicted under /section 324. Indian Penal Code, and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for one year. His relation. Rup Lai filed petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India praying that a writ in the form of habeas corpus or any other order or direction be issued direct-ins the respondent to release the convict immediately as- he had spent more time during the period of investigation, inauirv and trial of the case than the sentence imposed. On facts, the learned Judge lound that the convict had remained in detention for 13 months and 2 days, including 3 months and 24 days after his conviction. The relief claimed was granted with the following observations: