Rajpal vs State Of Haryana And Others on 15 November, 2010

[Cites 4, Cited by 0]

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Rajpal vs State Of Haryana And Others on 15 November, 2010

Bench: Ram Chand Gupta

         IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
                         CHANDIGARH




                                    Crl. Misc. No. M- 26484 of 2010(O&M)
                                     Date of Decision: November 15, 2010.


Rajpal
                                                  ...... PETITIONER(s)

                                   Versus

State of Haryana and others.
                                                  ...... RESPONDENT (s)


CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAM CHAND GUPTA


Present:    Mr. Deepak Gupta, Advocate
            for the petitioner.

            Mr. Amandeep Singh, A.A.G., Haryana.

                         *****


RAM CHAND GUPTA, J.(Oral)

The present petition has been filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure read with Articles 226/227 of Constitution of India seeking direction to respondents for premature release of the petitioner after adding remissions granted to him from time to time.

Reply has been filed on behalf of respondent-State. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the whole record.

CRM No.M-26484 of 2010 2

Admitted facts are that, petitioner has been undergoing imprisonment for life in FIR No.103 dated 15.05.1991, under Sections 392/302/34 IPC, Police Station Sadar, Bhiwani. He has already undergone more than 16 years and 6 months of actual sentence upto 02.10.2010. He has undergone more than 20 years of total sentence including remissions minus parole as on 02.10.2010. As on today, he has completed more than 20 years of sentence including remissions. His case was considered by the competent authority for premature release as per clause 2(a) of the policy, Annexure R- II according to which he has to complete 20 years of sentence including remissions. However, as petitioner had not completed more than 20 years of sentence including remissions when order, Annexure R-I was passed, he was not ordered to be released by the competent authority. However, now he has completed more than 20 years of sentence including remissions.

Hence, in view of these facts, respondents are directed to reconsider the case of petitioner for his premature release as per ratio of law laid down in State of Haryana and others v. Jagdish and Harpal, AIR 2010 (SC)1690 and in the light of observations of this Court made above, as per Act and rules and instructions on the point, within a period of one month from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.

Disposed of accordingly.

( RAM CHAND GUPTA ) November 15, 2010. JUDGE 'om'

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Punjab-Haryana High Court