SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1996 Supreme(SC) 394

G.B.PATTANAIK, K.RAMASWAMY
Union Territory Of Chandigarh – Appellant
Versus
Charanjit Kaur – Respondent


ORDER

Leave granted.

This appeal by special leave arises from the order of the High Court of Punjab and Haryana made on January 6, 1995 in C.M. No. 6872/95. The admitted facts are that the respondent was convicted for an offence of murder and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life. Admittedly, she was convicted on June 2, 1984 for an offence committed on September 24, 1983. She has been in custody from September 17, 1983. An application has been filed in the High Court for her premature release. In the impugned order,the High Court has directed the release of the respondent on the ground that the State had not filed the counter-affidavit, in spite of that fact that the case was adjourned on more than three occasions. The question is: whether the High Court has jurisdiction under Article 226 or under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short, the "Code") to release the prisoner.

3. Section 433 of the Code empowers the Government, in an appropriate case, without the consent of the person sentenced, to commute the sentence and to prematurely release the convict. Clause (b) thereof provides for a sentence of imprisonment for life, for imprisonment for a term not



Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top