RAMA SINGH Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioners, Rama Singh, Nagina Sharma, Ram Bilas Sharma, Jay Ram Sharma, Brij Nandan Singh, Rajendra Sharma have preferred instant writ seeking issuance of writs/direction in the nature of certiorari for quashing the part of decision dated 8.1.2010 passed by Bihar State Sentence Remission Board, Patna so far it relates to the petitioner, by which the petitioners prayer for remissions by way of premature release in accordance with Section 433 of the Cr.P.C. has been rejected.

(2.) Before coming to the points involved in this writ petition, salient features of the facts is to be noted down which would enable its appreciation in its right perspective.

(3.) Petitioners alongwith others stood arrayed as an accused of Goh P.S. Case No. 3/1977 registered under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302, 307, 326, 171B, 34 of the IPC and 27 of the Arms Act. Investigation thereafter commenced followed with sub-mission of charge-sheet and accordingly, they face trial and ultimately convicted by the Court of First Additional District and Sessions Judge, Aurangabad, in Sessions Trial Nos. 45/1978, 26/1980, vide judgment dated 31.8.1987 under Section 302/149 of the IPC and were sentenced to undergo R.I. for life. No sooner than they were taken into custody to serve out sentences. Subsequently thereof, so many criminal appeals were filed against the aforesaid judgment of conviction and sentence before the Hon'ble Court and so far petitioners are concerned, it happens to be Cr. Appeal No. 462/87 which was dismissed vide judgment dated 10.7.1990. The aforesaid finding was upheld in criminal appeal filed before the Hon'ble Apex Court. Accordingly, petitioner who were let of on bail by the Hon'ble High Court during pendency of Cr. Appeal No. 462/87 surrendered and since 1995 are in custody and so they have remained under custody consecutively for 21 years including the period of remission as provided. To support the same Annexures-3 & 4 has been annexed so obtained under Right to Information Act. Then it has been submitted that the case of the petitioners for premature release in accordance with Section 433 of the Cr.P.C. after granting remission, so provided, was taken into consideration and as per Annexure-5, their case was ultimately rejected. The sole ground for rejection happens to be that petitioners were involved in a ghasty crime relating to murder of seven persons over dispute of right to franchise. Although, some of the co-accused were released on the eve of golden jubilee of independence.