Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

3. The petitioner further submits that the said clarifications are contrary to the said G.O. and the first respondent has no power to read something, which is not there in the G.O. and as per the provisions of the said G.O. and the subsequent G.O.Ms. No. 71 dated 23.03.2000 special remission was granted. He further submits that there is no stipulation in G.O.Ms. No. 3 about disentitlement of the prisoners who overstayed Parole/Furlough for a cumulative period in excess of 10 years, therefore, the said clarifications are contrary to the G.O. A number of persons, who overstayed Parole, were also released in 2000 vide G.O.Ms. No. 18 dated 25.01.2000. Pursuant to the remission granted by virtue of the said G.O. one Mr. V. Veeraswamy, who overstayed Parole, was also released. Thus, he submits that the said clarifications issued by the first respondent are contrary to the Full Bench judgment of this Court in Indian Association Of Lawyers v. Principal Secretary, Home Department, Government of A.P.

Thereafter, he was apprehended by the police and admitted to the prison on 16.04.2005. Thus, he overstayed Parole for another period of 6 years 10 months 15 days. Accordingly, he was punished with head office memo No. SA.3/1061/05 dated 04.05.2005 denying him Parole/Furlough for a period of 4 years, to remove his name permanently from remission rolls, denial of interviews for three months and denial of canteen facilities for three months.

Thus, it is stated that the petitioner unlawfully overstayed Parole for a period of 13 years, 3 months, 7 days, which amounts to absconding from state custody. On both the occasions he was apprehended by the police and brought back to the prison to undergo unexpired portion of sentence.

6. It is further stated that insofar as the benefit of G.O.Ms. No. 3 dated 17.01.1995 is concerned, relating to premature release of prisoners, the petitioner was not confined in jail as on 17.01.1995 and he overstayed Parole and absconding from 23.07.1990 to 15.01.1997, therefore, remission was not awarded to him. Insofar as benefit of special remission as per G.O.Ms. No. 192 dated 11.08.1997 is concerned, he was awarded 20 months special remission as stipulated in the G.O., but as per the clarifications issued vide proceedings dated 30.03.200 about the eligibility of grant of special remission to the prisoners pursuant to G.O.Ms. No. 3 dated 17.01.1995 and G.O.Ms. No. 192 dated 11.08.1997, the first respondent clarified stating that special remission is not available/admissible "to the prisoners convicted in criminal cases, who have come out of prison on valid leave of absence ( like Parole/Furlough etc.) but have violated the Parole/Furlough conditions by overstaying or committing other offences". It is further stated that the petitioner overstayed Parole at the time of issuance of G.O.Ms. No. 3 dated 17.01.1995, therefore, he was not awarded special remission in 1995 as the cases of prisoners, who overstayed Parole, are being treated as escape by lodging complaint in respective police stations under Section 224 IPC. The petitioner was not entitled for special remission in the year 1995 due to his overstay of Parole, and he was punished with removal of his name from remission rolls permanently.

13. Though I am of the opinion that the said circular instructions are not binding on this Court and cannot be looked into, but the petitioner is not entitled to remission of sentence, as his case fulfills the clauses specified in the said G.O. Therefore, the petitioner is not entitled for any special/State remission as per the order of the Government in G.O.Ms. No. 3 dated 17.01.1995. To get the benefit of G.O.Ms. No. 3, admittedly the petitioner has not undergone the total sentence of 10 years including 7 seven years of actual sentence as on 14.01.1995, therefore, he was rightly denied special remission. In fact, he was on Parole prior to the issuance of the G.O. from 23.07.1990, he was due to surrender on 23.08.1990, but he was not on parole as the date of issuance of the G.O. as he was absconding by overstaying Parole, not only prior to the issuance of the G.O.; as on the date of the G.O. and subsequently up to 15.01.1997. However, even assuming that the said circular is not applicable to the petitioner, he is not at all entitled to special remission, as admittedly he did not fulfill the requirement of Clause 2(a) of the said G.O. by completing the total sentence of 10 years including 7 years of actual sentence as on 14.01.1995. Apart from that, in fact, the petitioner was awarded punishment of removal of his name from the remission rolls and he never questioned the same. As a matter of fact, the petitioner was given remission as per G.O.Ms. No. 192, as he was in the prison as on the date of issuance of the G.O. on 11.08.1997, though he overstayed Parole for a period of 6 years 10 months 15 days, he was awarded 20 months of special remission as stipulated in the G.O.