1999 Supreme(Mad) 1079
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
S. Thangaraj, J.
A. Periyalwar
Versus
The State of Tamil Nadu and others
Crl.O.P. Nos. 10722, 17137 and 21467 of 1998.
Decided On : 13 October 1999
R.Regupathy, A.Packiaraj and K.R.Thiagarajan, for Petitioners.
R.Shanmugasundaram, Public Prosecutor, for Respondents.
Remission of sentence is a legal right.
Headnote:Criminal Procedure Code (II of 1974), Sec.432 - Constitution of India (1950), Art. 161 - - G.O.Ms.No.1762, Home (Prisons-IV), dated 20.7.1987-Remission of sentence -Petitioners convicted for offences under Prevention of Corruption Act, held entitled to premature release or remission of sentence in spite of the G.O.
2.Crl.O.P.No.10722 of 1998: The petitioner Periyalwar was convicted by learned VI Additional Special Judge (now IV Additional Special Judge), Chennai in C.C.No.22 of 1989 for alleged offences under Secs.7 and 13(1)(d) read with Sec.13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and learned Judge found the petitioner guilty under the above sections convicted and sentenced him to undergo rigourous imprisonment for 2 years and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000 in default to undergo rigourous imprisonment for 3 months. The petitioner has filed Criminal Appeal No.804 of 1990 before this Court and the appeal was dismissed with the observation that the jail authorities to take into account the various G.Os. in respect of remission. The petitioner has claimed remission as under:
(1) G.O.Ms.No.279, Home (Prisons-IV) Dept., dated 23.2.1992 for 6 months.
(2) G.O.Ms.No.296, Home (Prisons-IV) Dept. dated 22.2.1993 for 6 months.
(3) G.O.Ms.No.205, Home (Prisons-IV) Dept. dated 23.2.1994 for 6 months.
(4) G.O.Ms.No.1342, Home (Prisons - IV) Dept. dated 12.9.1996 for 6 months.
(5) G.O.Ms.No.1163, Home (Prisons-IV) Dept. dated 12.8.1997 for 4 1/2 months.
3.Crl.O.P.No.17137 of 1998: The petitioner one Parthiban, an accused in S.C.No.8 of 1989 on the file of the Special Judge-cum-Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kumbakonam, for offences under Secs.5(2) read with 5(1)(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act. Learned Special Judge-cum-Chief Judicial Magistrate found him guilty under the said section convicted and sentenced him to undergo rigourous imprisonment for 2 years and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000. The petitioner has paid the fine amount. The petitioner has filed Criminal Appeal No.158 of 1992 on the file of this Court and his sentence was reduced and modified to rigourous imprisonment for 1 year by an order dated 10.8.1998. The petitioner has claimed remission granted under the Government Orders:
(1) G.O.Ms.No.296, Home (Prisons-IV) Dept., dated 20.2.1993, 6 months
(2) G.O.Ms.No.205, Home (Prisons-IV) Dept., dated 23.2.1994, 6 months
(3) G.O.Ms.No.1163, Home (Prisons-IV) Dept., dated 12.8.1997, 3 months
4.Crl.O.P.No.21467 of 1998: The petitioner Sheik Abdullah is an accused in C.C.No.536 of 1989 on the file of the Special Judge-cum-Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sivagangai for offence under Sec.7 read with Secs.13(1)(d) and 13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act. Learned Special Judge-cum Chief Judicial Magistrate found the accused guilty under the above section convicted and sentenced him to undergo rigourous imprisonment for 1 year and to pay a fine of Rs.200. Further, it was ordered that the sentences should run concurrently. The petitioner has preferred an appeal in Criminal Appeal No.367 of 1992 and the same was dismissed by this Court on 2.11.1998 confirming the conviction and sentence. The petitioner has claimed remission of the sentence under:
(1) G.O.Ms.No.296, Home (Prisons-IV) Dept. dated 20.2.1993, for 6 months
(2) G.O.Ms.No.205, Home (Prisons-IV) Dept. dated 23.2.1994. for 6 months
(3) G.O.Ms.No.1163, Home (Prisons-IV) Dept for dated 12.8.1997.3 months
5. All these 3 petitioners pray for remission of their respective sentences under the above G.Os.
6. There is no dispute regarding the other G.Os. However, the respondent police raised an objection for the remission pleaded by the petitioners on the basis of G.O.Ms.No.1762, Home (Prisons-IV) Department, dated 20.7.1987. The relevant portion in the said G.O. is as follows:
"ORDER:
In para 17.2 of Chapter XX of its report, the All India Committee has recommended that the following categories of prisoners should not be eligible for consideration of premature release:
(i) Prisoners convicted of rape, forgery, dacoity, terrorist crimes, offences against the State and prisoners sentenced under Secs.224, 376, 396