I N THE HI GH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAI NI TAL HON’BLE THE CHI EF JUSTI CE SRI G. NARENDAR AND HON’BLE SRI JUSTI CE ALOK MAHRA

01^st APRI L, 2025 WRI T PETI TI ON CRI MI NAL No. 117 OF 2025 Yashwant Singh …Petitioner Versus State of Uttarakhand And Another …Respondents Presence:-

Mr. Sandeep Kothari, learned counsel for the petitioner.

Mr. J.S. Virk, learned Deputy Advocate General for the State.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

JUDGMENT: (per Mr. Alok Mahra, J.)

By means of this writ petition, petitioner has sought the following reliefs:-

“(a) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to release the petitioner in connection with Case Crime No. 67 of 2007 convicted by judgment and order passed by learned District and Sessions Judge, Chamoli, District Chamoli.”

2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Deputy Advocate General for the State.

3. The petitioner was convicted under Section 302/34 and 120-B of IPC by the learned Trial Court and was sentenced to life imprisonment with a fine of Rs.5000/-. Against his conviction, the petitioner preferred an appeal being Criminal Appeal No. 147 of 2009 before this Court challenging the judgment of the Trial Court, but, the same was dismissed by this Court vide order dated 26.06.2013. The SLP filed by the petitioner was also dismissed by the Hon’ble Apex Court.

4. Petitioner has filed the present writ petition for his premature release on the basis of the judgment dated 27.09.2024 passed by the Division Bench of this Court in WPPIL No. 50 of 2024.

5. Petitioner has contended that respondents have filed a list of 34 inmates before the Hon’ble Court, whose cases were not recommended for release. The name of the petitioner finds place at Sr. No. 2 of the said list.

6. In the order dated 27.09.2024, the Hon’ble Court have directed for release of 33 out of 34 inmates of the said list, as they do not fall under the prohibited category as envisaged in Rule 5 of the Uttarakhand State (For Sentence Pardon/Premature Release of Convicted Prisoners Punished with Sentence of Imprisonment for Life by the Court) Permanent Policy, 2022 (for short “the 2022 Policy”).

7. Mr. J.S. Virk, learned Deputy Advocate General submits that as per Rule 522 of the 2022 Policy, the case of the petitioner was considered by the State Level Committee and after scrutiny of the case of the petitioner, the State Level Committee has rejected the case of the petitioner twice for premature release of the petitioner i.e. vide orders dated 31.10.2024 and 14.12.2024. He further submits that now new rules have been framed under the Jail Manual Act for premature release of the prisoners and after framing of the new rules, the Policy of 2022 is no more in existence.

8. In view of the fact that since the case of the petitioner for premature release has been rejected by the State Level Committee, therefore, petitioner would have to challenge his orders of rejection.

9. Keeping in view the subsequent events, the present writ petition is dismissed.

_______________ G. NARENDAR, C.J.

_________________

ALOK MAHRA, J.

Dt: 1^st April, 2025

UJJWAL