JAI PARKASH Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) LEARNED counsel for the State states that the written statement was filed in the office. However the same is not forthcoming on the record. A photostat copy of the same has been filed in the Court. It is taken on record.

(2.) THE Petitioner along with three others was convicted under Section 302 I. P.C. and was sentenced to undergo for life. The petitioner has. of today, undergone more than 12 years actual sentence and with remissions, more than 19 years but his case for premature release has been rejected by the State Level Committee vide order dated 2 1994 on the ground that the petitioner along with three others killed the deceased Om Parkash with knife is ghastly and brutal manner in the heart of the city who was an unarmed and innocent citizen. Taking this into consideration, the Committee decided to consider the case of the petitioner for temporary release only after the petitioner had undergone actual sentence of 14 years and after earning at least 6 years remissions.

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner's case does not fall under para 2(a) of the instructions dated 19.11.1991 (anexure P -3) but falls under pars 2(b) of the said instructions. He also contended that petitioner has not committed any offence which could be considered as heinous. Annexure P -1 is the copy of the judgement whereby the petitioner was found guilty of the offence under Section 302 I.P.C.