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

2019 Supreme(P&H) 404

KULDIP SINGH
AVTAR SINGH – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF HARYANA – Respondent


Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
Loveleen Dhaliwal, Adv., Gaurav Jindal, Adv.

JUDGMENT :

Kuldip Singh, J.

Petitioners Avtar Singh, Balbir Singh and Fateh Singh were convicted by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Kaithal vide judgment of conviction dated 21.11.2006 and order of sentence dated 27.11.2016 (Annexure P-4) under Sections 148, 302, 326, 325 & 324 of Indian Penal Code along with seven other co-accused and sentenced to the maximum imprisonment for life.

2. According to the petitioners, they have undergone the requisite sentence of 10 years without remission and 14 years with remission and qualify to be considered for premature release under the Policy dated 12.04.2002 (Annexure P-7). However the Government of Haryana vide impugned orders dated 03.04.2017 (Annexures P-1 to P-3) rejected their case on the ground that case of the petitioners is covered under Clause 2(a) (x) (murder exhibiting brutality such as cutting body in piece etc.) and not under Clause 2(b) which pertain to ordinary murders. Therefore, the petitioners are required to undergo and actual sentence of 14 years and with remission 20 years. The petitioners have challenged the said order being illegal.

3. The State in the reply while referring to Section 433 A of Cr.P.C. has taken the plea

















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