MUKHO MANDAL Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned Counsel for the petitioners as also learned Counsel for the respondents.

(2.) THROUGH this writ petition, the petitioners, who stand convicted for the offence punishable under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and are undergoing sentence of imprisonment for life, have sought the following reliefs :

(3.) FROM the counter-affidavit which has been filed in this case it appears that the stand has been taken that these petitioners cannot be released unless they complete 14 years in prison excluding remission. FROM the counter-affidavit it also appears that the proposal for premature release on consideration of remission relating to several persons including the petitioners had been sent by the Jail Superintendent in pursuance of the provisions of Rule 710 and Rule 527 of the Bihar Jail Manual by Memo No. 1198 dated 11.5.1993 to the Under Secretary, Law Department, who has returned the proposal of the petitioners among others with some quarries. It also appears that notices have been issued to all the petitioners to submit copy of the judgment of the trial court or the appellate court concerned. Paragraph 10 of the counter-affidavit specifically says that the petitioners have not completed 14 years in jail custody and, therefore, they are not entitled for release. learned Counsel for the respondent has relied on the provisions of Section 433-A of the Code of Criminal Procedure and the decision (Bhagirath v. Delhi Administration) as also the decision of this Court reported in 1993 (1) PLJR 623 (Satrughan Prasad v. State of Bihar) and contended that the petitioners cannot get release unless they complete 14 years in prison excluding remission which is admissible.