The court clarified that life convicts are eligible for premature release considerations, with proper compliance of procedural requirements, including set-off periods of incarceration during trial.

1. As the cases on hand deal with the same detenu with the interlinked issues, they are appositely disposed of by a common judgment.

2. The detenu, who is a life convict was found guilty of the offences punishable under S.302 and S.392, IPC in S.C.No.80 of 2008 by the Additional District and Sessions Judge (Fast Track Court No.I), Erode, on 10.11.2008 and accordingly, he was sentenced to undergo life imprisonment and 10 years rigorous imprisonment respectively.

3. The appeal filed by the convict, on contest, was dismissed in Criminal Appeal No.107 of 2009 on 18.08.2009.

4. The Government Order was passed providing for premature release to the life convict in G.O.Ms.No.64, Home(Prison - IV) Department, dated 01.02.2018 in commemoration of 100 Birthday of former Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu late Dr.M.G. Ramachandran. The following is the operative portion of the said order.
"5 (II) The life convicts who have competed 10 years of actual imprisonment as on 25.02.2018 and the life convicts who are aged 60 years and above and who have completed 5 years of actual imprisonment on 25.02.2018 including those who were originally sentenced to death by Trial Court and modified to life sentence by the Appellate Court (other than those whose convicts have been commuted), may be considered for premature release subject to satisfaction of the following conditions."

5. The writ petitioner, who is the wife of the convict, made a representation on 06.02.2018 seeking inclusion of her husband's name in the list of prisoners eligible for premature release. As the said request was not considered, the convict approached this Court seeking a writ of mandamus in W.P.No.3672 of 2018. The following is the order passed by the learned single Judge on 07.01.2019.
"3.The learned Additional Public Prosecutor on instructions would submit that the representation will be considered by the 2nd and 3rd respondents and a detailed report will be prepared in accordance with GO.Ms.No.64 dated 01.02.2018 and the same will be placed before the 1st respondent, who will consider the same and submit his recommendation before His Excellency the Governor of Tamil Nadu, if the petitioner is going to be considered for a premature release.
4.This Court has carefully considered the submissions made on either side and also the materials placed on record.
5. The wife of the petitioner has made a representation dated 06.02.2018. This representation shall be considered by the 2nd and 3rd respondents strictly in accordance with the guidelines given in G.O.Ms.No.64 dated 01.02.2018 and a report shall be placed before the 1st respondent within a period of four weeks form the date of receipt of a copy of this Order. On receipt of the report, the 1st respondent shall take a decision within a period of eight weeks, thereafter."

6. Upon consideration of the said representation, as directed by the learned single Judge, the impugned Government Order was passed in G.O.(D) No.658 Home (Prison - IV) Department dated 26.06.2019 rejecting the case of the convict on the premise that he had completed only 9 years and 24 days of actual imprisonment as on 25.02.2018 instead of mandatory requirement of 10 years completion for eligibility. The requisite part of the order contained in the Government Order referred above is reproduced hereunder.
"6. The Government have examined the request of Tmt. Shanthi seeking premature release of her husband / Life convict prisoner No.6961 Palaniswamy alias Palaniyappan S/o.Andiappan, Confine