SATISH KUMAR AHUJA Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) WHETHER the petitioner is entitled to the benefit of remissions in the given circumstances or not is a short point involved in the present petition and this point has to be answered in the context that what is the effect of the judgment passed by the appellate Court/revisional Court when such Court interferes in the judgment and order of the first appellate Court.

(2.) FEW facts can be noticed :- Shri Satish Kumar Ahuja, the present petitioner, filed the present petition claiming that he may be given the benefit of all the remissions granted by the State of Haryana from time to time w.e.f. 27.11.1981 to 15.7.1992 when he was taken into custody in pursuance of the judgment passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court on 10.4.1992 vide which the judgment of the High Court dated 25.11.1981 was set aside.

(3.) ON the contrary, the counsel for the petitioner has relied upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court reported as AIR 1980 Supreme Court 2147, the famous case of Maru Ram and others v. Union of India and others. The Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner was released from the jail under the orders of the Hon'ble High Court. The judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court would relate back from the date when the Hon'ble High Court order was passed for the acquittal of the petitioner and the petitioner will be considered in deemed custody right from the date of his actual discharge from the jail i.e. w.e.f. 27.11.1981.