The trial Court, inferior to the High Court and Supreme Court, cannot add riders to a sentence of life imprisonment, and the power to modify such sentences is available only with the High Courts and the Supreme Court.

JUDGMENT

Dr. S. Muralidhar, J. - This is a petition challenging the order dated 5 th June, 2020 of the Divisional Commissioner, Hisar, ('Divisional Commissioner') rejecting the Petitioner's application for temporary release/parole, on the grounds that the trial Court i.e. the Court of the Additional Sessions Judge, Hisar, has by an order dated 16 th October 2018 awarded her a sentence of imprisonment for life i.e. whole of her natural life, without any remission, consequent to her conviction for the offences under Sections 302, 343 and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code in FIR No. 429 of 2014 registered at Police Station Barwala.

2. It has been argued by Mr. Arjun Sheoran, learned counsel for the Petitioner, that the reasons given in the impugned order dated 5 th June, 2020 of the Divisional Commissioner are contrary to the law laid down by the Supreme Court in Union of India vs. V. Sriharan @ Murugan (2016) 1 SCC 1 . In other words, he submitted that the trial Court could not have while awarding the sentence directed that the Petitioner would not be entitled to any remission and further that her request for temporary release/parole could not have been refused on that ground. He pointed out that the Petitioner had recently lost her husband and her two sons had abandoned her. He referred to the photographs enclosed with the petition to show that the Petitioner's house needed urgent repairs for which reason she had sought parole for four weeks.

3. On the other hand, Mr. Ankur Mittal, learned Additional Advocate General, Haryana, to begin with, pointed out that the Petitioner sought parole for a period of four weeks on the ground that her house needed repairs and this request was referrable to Section 3 (1) (d) of the Haryana Good Conduct Prisoners (Temporary Release) Act, 1988 ('Act') read with Rule 8 (iii) of the Haryana Good Conduct Prisoners (Temporary Release), Rules, 2007 ('Rules'). He further pointed out that in terms of Rule 4 of the Rules, the Petitioner shall be entitled to apply for parole only after completing one year of imprisonment after conviction and has earned her first annual god conduct remission (AGCR) under the Act. According to Mr. Mittal since the sentence awarded by the trial Court specifically states that the Petitioner should serve life sentence for her entire natural life, without remission, the question of her being eligible for AGCR would not arise and consequently, she would be ineligible to be considered for parole. In this context he referred to a recent judgment dated 3 rd July, 2020 of a learned Single Judge of the High Court of Delhi in Sanjay Kumar Valmiki v. State [W.P.(CrL) 2049 and 682 of 2019], and submitted that the Divisional Commissioner cannot be stated to have committed any error as long as the order on sentence passed by the trial Court, and which is under appeal before this Court, stood.

4. On the last date of hearing, Mr. Sheoran, learned counsel for the Petitioner had sought time to place on record copy of an order passed by the Superintendent, Central Jail, Ambala granting parole to one of the co-convicts in a connected FIR.

5. The Petitioner has, along with an application CRM-W-731-2020, placed on record a copy of an order dated 7 th January, 2020 passed by Superintendent, Central Jail, Ambala granting parole/temporary release to co-convict Pawan in a connected FIR No. 430 dated 19 th November, 2020, registered at Police Station, Barwala, Hisar. It has been pointed out that Pawan too had been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life without remission till natural death and yet, in his case, not only was parole granted, but, in fact, now stands extended as a result of the orders of the High Powered Committee ('HPC').

6. The above submissions have been considered. To being with, the applicable statutory provision and the Rules may be referred to. Sections 3 (1) (d) and 10 (2) (d) of the Act which are relevant for the present purpose read as under:

"3. Temporary release of pr