Back
PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT
A.S.Bains, J.
Tarlok Singh
Versus
State Of Punjab
Criminal Misc. No. 2 of 1983,
Decided On : JANUARY 19, 1983
Premature Release - Convicted Detenu - The court directed the State Government to consider the case of the petitioner for premature release within two months, citing the authority of the Supreme Court and indicating that failure to do so would result in the petitioner's release on bail.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner was convicted and sentenced to life imprisonment for the offence under section 302, Indian Penal Code. He sought premature release, but the State had not filed any reply, citing a pending decision by a larger Bench on whether life convicts can be released on bail during the pendency of a writ petition.
Finding of the Court:
The court directed the State Government to consider the case of the petitioner for premature release within two months. In case of failure to do so, the petitioner would be released on bail by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gurdaspur.
Issues: The main issue was the petitioner's request for premature release and the State's stand on the matter, which was influenced by a pending decision by a larger Bench.
Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on the authority of the Supreme Court in Sri Niwas and others v. Delhi Administration and others, AIR 1982 SC 391, which directed the State to consider premature release cases of convicts who have undergone more than fourteen years of imprisonment including remissions.
Final Decision: The application was allowed, and the State Government was directed to consider the petitioner's case for premature release within two months, with the provision for release on bail by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gurdaspur, in case of failure to do so.
A.S.Bains, J.
1. The petitioner was convicted and sentenced to imprisonment for life for the offence under section 302, Indian Penal Code, by the Sessions Judge, Gurdaspur on 5th December, 1975. According to him, he has undergone 16 years and 24 days including remissions. Cases of such like convicts are considered for premature release by the State Government under para 516B of the Punjab Jail Manual after the expiry of 14 years of sentence including remissions.
2. The State has not filed any reply. The stand taken by the State is that since the main petition of the detenu is pending for awaiting the decision by a larger Bench, this application of the petitioner may also be decided after the decision by the larger Bench. The matter before larger Bench is whether the life convicts can be released on bail during the pendency of the writ petition ?
3. In this application the only prayer made by the detenu is that his case may be considered by the State Government for premature release. He has not prayed for bail during pendency of the writ petition. The matter is otherwise clinched by the latest authority of the Supreme Court reported as Sri Niwas and other v. Delhi Administration and others, AIR 1982 SC 391, wherein their Lordships of the Supreme Court, while deciding a bunch of cases, directed the State to consider the premature release cases of the convicts who have undergone more than fourteen years of imprisonment including remissions and also directly released 16 such convicts and granted bail in 6 cases.
4. In the circumstances it is directed that the State Government will consider the case of the petitioner for his premature release within two months from today. In case of its failure to do so, the petitioner will be released on bail by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gurdaspur.
5. With these observations this application is allowed.
AI
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
