ORDER :

1. By way of present petition, the petitioner herein has prayed for to direct the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for full remission of sentence under Section 432 and/or 433-A of the Criminal Procedure Code.

2. It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner herein was convicted and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for life and fine of Rs.1850/- and in default to undergo simple imprisonment for further three months under Section 302, 304(2), 307, 324, 149 of Indian Penal Code and by the learned City Sessions Court No.7, Ahmedabad in the Sessions Case No.67 of 1999 on 23.10.2001.

3. Mr. Piyushkumar K. Baseri, the learned advocate appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner had completed the sentence of 16 years, 7 months and 8 days on date 31.07.2017 as per the custody certificate issued by the Deputy Superintendent, Ahmedabad. Under such circumstances, the case of the petitioner-prisoner is required to be considered for the remission of sentence. That the committee for the remission of the petitioner sentence was met on 20.05.2017 and the report was sent to the State Government on 13.07.2017. The decision for his remission of his remaining sentence is not taken till the filing of the present petition.

Mr. Piyushkumar K. Baseri, the learned advocate appearing for the petitioner further submitted that the petitioner has also made an application in the month of August to the respondents to consider his case for full remission of his sentence under Section 433-A of the Criminal Procedure Code. The application is also not been decided till the date of filing of the present petition. Mr. Piyushkumar K. Baseri, the learned advocate appearing for the petitioner further submitted that the case of the petitioner is also required to be considered in view of the Government Resolution dated 23.10.1992, wherein the only condition is of condition of 14 years of imprisonment. As the petitioner has completed the imprisonment of 16 years, his case is required to be considered. A copy of the Government Resolution dated 23.10.1992 is duly produced on record at Annexure-C.

4. Heard Mr. Mr. Piyushkumar K. Baseri, the learned advocate appearing for the petitioner and Ms. Maithili D. Mehta, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent - State.

5. Mr. Piyushkumar K. Baseri, the learned advocate appearing for the petitioner vehemently submitted that, petitioner's application for release on remission is concerned, should have been considered in tune with the policy which was prevailing on the date of his conviction and not the subsequent policies, if any, unless they are beneficial and accordingly, the case of the petitioner for full remission of his sentence is required to be considered in tune with the policy of the Government Resolution dated 23.10.1992, which was prevailing at the time of his conviction dated i.e. 23.10.2001. Mr. Piyushkumar K. Baseri, the learned advocate appearing for the petitioner has also relied on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of State of Haryana & Others Versus Jagdish, reported in 2010 (4) SCC 216 and Special Criminal Application No.1520 of 2012, order dated 18.05.2012.

6. Ms. Maithili D. Mehta, the Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent - State submitted that the case of the petitioner herein is pending consideration before the Advisory Board Committee and therefore, the case of the petitioner shall be considered in the next meeting of the Advisory Board Committee. Ms. Maithili D. Mehta, the Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent - State submitted that the policy of the 1992 was replaced by Government Resolution dated 14.01.2014 issued by the State Government, and the petitioner is not fulfilling the condition of the aforesaid Government Resolution, however, at present in view of the representation dated 01.08.2017 addressed to the Secretary, Home Department, Sachivalaya, Gandhinagar,