LAKHVINDER SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Lakhminder Singh-petitioner was tried and held guilty of the offence punishable under S. 302 of the Indian Penal Code at Bangalore. It was alleged that the offence was committed on 22-6-1987. The Learned Additional Sessions Judge, Bangalore held the petitioner guilty of the said offence on 5-1-1989. The petitioner was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life. The petitioner applied for his transfer to the State of Punjab. On 3-4-1992 the Inspector General of Prisons sent memo to Inspector General of Prisons, Karnataka. By virtue of the same consent was given for transfer of the convict on reciprocal basis. The said consent reads :- "Reference on the subject letter No. 5169-GI/G-6, dated 25-9-1991 on the subject noted above.

(2.) This department has already conveyed concurrence vide letter under reference the transfer of convict cited as subject to the State on reciprocal basis. Accordingly you are requested to make necessary arrangements for his transfer to this State at the earliest as the parents of the prisoner are pressing hard for the same." In pursuance of the said consent the petitioner was transferred to Central Jail, Gurdaspur in accordance with Trnasfer of Prisoners Act, 1950. 2. By virtue of the present petition, the petitioner seeks that he has been deprived of the remission that are granted by the State of Punjab to its prisoners in pursuance of the remissions granted under Art. 161 of the Constitution. In the alternative he contends that he should be given the remissions that are awarded to the prisoners of Karnataka and that the petitioner was deprived of the remissions granted to the prisoners of Punjab and that he is being discriminated.

(3.) In the reply filed by the State of Punjab, the petition has been contested. Preliminary objections have been taken that the petitioner has no right to claim premature release. The petitioner has been sentenced to imprisonment for life and, therefore, he has no right to claim premature release. In accordance with Section 433-A of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the petitioner is required to undergo at least 14 years' sentence before he can claim premature release. So far as remissions granted to the prisoners in Punjab are concerned, the defence offered is that the petitioner is not entitled to the benefit of special remissions because under the instructions special remissions are granted only to those prisoners who have been convicted by the Courts of criminal jurisdiction in the State of Punjab. The petitioner has been convicted and sentenced to life imprisonment by the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Bangalore. The instructions issued by the Governor of Punjab are not applicable to the petitioner. It is the State of Karnataka which is the appropriate authority. On merits similar pleas were offered. It was pointed out that on the date the reply is filed the petitioner had undergone 8 years and 20 days of actual sentence. This excludes the under-trial period. He had earned 1 year, 11 months and 12 days remissions. The premature release of the petitioner can only be considered by the State of Karnataka. It is not disputed that the petitioner had been released on parole for a period of four weeks in pursuance of the direction given by this Court but it is insisted that the petitioner is not entitled to the special remissions claimed by him.