( 1 ) THIS petition has been placed before the Full Bench on a interference by one of us (K. N. Shukla, J.), There have been conflicting decisions about the scope of interference by this Court and numerous cases are being filed by prisoners Under the M. P. Prisonerst Release on Probation Act.

( 2 ) FACTS as stated in the order of reference are as follows. Petitioner is undergoing a sentence of life imprisonment under section 302 IPC. The petitioner has not disclosed the date of the Judgment, the circumstances under which he was prosecuted or the findings on the basis of which be was convicted. The petitioner has merely stated that he had applied for release on probation under section 2 of the M. P. Prisoners Release on Probation Act, 1954 (the Probation Act hereafter) before the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court directed the State Government to decide petitioners application within seven months and if the application was not decided within this period the petitioner would be entitled to be released on bail. Petitioners application was not decided within the time allowed by the Supreme Court and he was released on bail. The Probation Board, however, considered the application of the petitioner as per Rules framed under the Probation Act and recommended to the State Government that the application was liable to be rejected. Accepting the recommendation of the Probation Board, the State Government rejected the application of the petitioner for being released on probation by order dated 6. 3. 1987 (Annexure R-I ).

( 3 ) THE petitioner prayed that the Probation Board be directed to reconsider the case of the petitioner because the grounds stated by the Board and accepted by the State Government were not sufficient for rejecting his application.

( 4 ) IT may be mentioned at this stage itself that the Probation Board did not recommend petitionerts release on two grounds. First was that his release was likely to disturb the peace and secondly the guardian proposed by the petitioner was not a fit person for keeping supervision over the petitioner.

( 5 ) RELEASE of a prisoner under the Probation Act is governed by the terms of the statute and the Rules made thereunder. Administrative authorities, in particular those which are in charge of maintenance of law and order, have been entrusted with the job of deciding the propriety of releasing a prisoner after examining his case. The parameters are mentioned in section 2 of the Probation Act. Section 2 is as follows:

2. Power of Government to release by licence on conditions imposed by it notwithstanding anything contained in section 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. 1898, where a person is confined in a prison under sentence of imprisonment, and it appears to the Government from his antecedent and his conduct in the prison that he is likely to abstain from crime and lead a peaceable life, if he is released from prison, the Government may, by licence, permit him to be released on condition that he, be placed under the supervision or authority of a Government Officer or of a person professing the same religion as the prisoner or such institution or society as may be recognised by the Government for the purpose provided such other person institution or society is willing to take charge of him.

It may be noted that the Authorities concerned have to be satisfied that the prisoner fulfills two conditions, namely: 1. Antecedent, and 2. Conduct in the prison. On the basis of these factors the government has to be satisfied that the prisoner is likely to abstain from crime and lead 2 peaceable life. This scrutiny is very necessary because the purpose of penal Ia w is to keep the stream of social life free from unsocial or dangerous elements. The responsibility of the Government therefore, is certainly heavy and a prisoner who has been found guilty of a heinous offence can not claim as of right to be released on probation under the Probation Act merely because his conduct in priso