LIMBU HEMBROM Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE two writ petitioners, namely, Limbu Hembrom and Dadu @ Kirani @ Bijay Hembrom, were accused along with the third accused, namely, Shyam Charan Hembrom. All these three accused faced the trial in the Sessions Trial No. 128 of 1995 wherein they have been convicted by the Trial Court vide judgment dated 28th September, 1996 and by same order dated 28th September, 1996, they have been sentenced to undergo life imprisonment for committing offence punishable under Section 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code and they have further been sentenced to undergo 7 years R.I. for committing offence punishable under Section 201/34 of the Indian Penal Code and both the sentences were made to run concurrently.

(2.) WRIT petitioner no. 1, Limbu Hembrom has served the sentence of 25 years 1 month and 15 days as on 5th April, 2011 whereas, petitioner no. 2, Dadu @ Kirani @ Bijay Hembrom, served the sentence of 25 years 3 moths and 10 days as on 5th April, 2011 including the period of remission. They have served the requisite sentence for consideration of their cases for pre -mature release in the light of the policy decision taken by the State Government time to time. Their cases were considered by the Competent Committee constituted by the State Government and by a decision taken in the meeting of the Committee dated 20.05.2011, 25.05.2011 and 27.05.2011 and the Committee found that these two petitioners are not entitled to be released pre -maturely. The case of third accused, namely, Shyam Charan Hembrom was also considered in the same meeting and his case was also rejected by the said Committee. The said accused Shyam Charan Hembrom preferred writ petition before this Court being W.P. (Cr.) No. 25 of 2011, which has been allowed vide order dated 29.07.2011 and in pursuance of the said order, the State Government has already passed the release order as per learned counsel for the writ petitioner.

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the State submitted that looking to the gravity of the offence, these two writ petitioners could not have been released pre -maturely as in case of their release, they will certainly again indulge themselves in the same type of crime and will create the problem for the law and order.