RAMADHAR SINGH SON OF LATE HARI KISHUN SINGH RESIDENT OF VILLAGE Vs. THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH THE SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF HOME, GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, PATNA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this writ petition, the petitioner has sought a writ of habeas corpus for his release from custody.

(2.) A counter affidavit was called for and in that, it is disclosed that the State Remission Board (for brevity, the Board), in its meeting dated 28.11.2016, considered the case of petitioner but only on the ground that the petitioner was convicted in a case of multiple murders, he was refused to be released in view of Rule 481 (i) (ka) of the Bihar Prison Manual, 2012 as was amended with effect from 26.05.2016 which, inter alia, provided certain categories of convicts who are not liable to be given benefit of remission and shortening of sentence. Petitioner challenges this stand of the State Government. It is, inter alia, submitted on behalf of petitioner that this condition was introduced only recently in absence whereof there was no other ground for denying the benefit to the petitioner. Learned counsel for the State does not contest this position. It is submitted on behalf of petitioner that the conditions for premature release and grant of remission, as has been held by the Apex Court as also by this Court in several judgments, is the law that obtains on the day when a person is first convicted. That being the situation and position in law, State cannot refer to a subsequent amendment to deny the benefit which had accrued to a convict on the date of his conviction.

(3.) Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State at length, in our view, the position of law has repeatedly been dealt with by this Court and the last being the detailed judgment in the case of Ram Naresh Rai Vs. State of Bihar & Others being Cr.WJC No. 1053 of 2016 which was disposed of on 21.11.2016.