LAWS(P&H)-2008-9-26

BHUPINDER SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

Decided On September 22, 2008
BHUPINDER SINGH Appellant
V/S
STATE OF PUNJAB Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner, a lifer undergoing incarceration on account of his conviction under Section 302 IPC in case FIR No. 104 dated 9.7.1997, Police Station, Baghapurana, has filed the present petition for a direction to the respondents to grant him premature release in terms of instructions contained in para 431 of the Punjab Jail Manual, 1996 (Annexure P-3). The plea, raised in the context, is that the petitioner having undergone actual sentence for 10 years and total sentence of more than 14 years , is entitled to be considered for premature release in the light of the above instructions, particularly when he has maintained a good conduct and did not commit any jail offence during the period of his incarceration. Further averment is that the denial of pre-mature release to the petitioner is violative of instructions Annexure P-3 and amounts to his wrongful confinement.

(2.) THE respondents, by filing a counter, reiterated the correctness of the impugned denial by pointing out that the petitioner having been convicted for a heinous crime shall be eligible for premature release only after he has undergone actual sentence for a period of 12 years and 18 years of total sentence including remissions etc. Further averment in the context is that the petitioner had been convicted on a charge that he had caused a bomb blast in a temple in the area of Baghapurana.

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner argues that the case of the petitioner is covered under Category ( C); whereas the State presentation is that it is Category (B) which is applicable to the petitioner because the charge proved against him was heinous in nature. In the face of the presentation on behalf of the State, learned counsel for the petitioner points out that the crime, for which the petitioner was convicted, does not fall within the definition of heinous crime which have been defined in Annexure P-3 itself. For enabling appropriate adjudication of the controversy, the definitive/enumeration clause recorded in Annexure P-3 itself, is reproduced as under :-