Amrik Singh and ors. vs State of Punjab and ors.

Harminder Kaur Sandhu, J.

The petitioners Amrik Singh and Jeet Singh were tried by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Faridkot, in a case registered vide First Information Report No. 193 dated June 6,1979 of Police Station Bagga, Purana. They were held guilty and were sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/ for the offence under Section 325, Indian Penal Code. The petitioner preferred an appeal against the judgment recording their conviction and sentence, which was dismissed by this court on April 26, 1982. Thereafter the petitioners surrendered before the jail authorities. They then filed a Special Leave Petition in the Hon''ble Supreme Court in July 1982. Their appeal was admitted and they were allowed bail. On February 4 1993, the Hon''ble Supreme Court partially accepted the appeal of the petitioners. Their conviction under Section 325, Indian Penal Code was confirmed but sentence of two years rigorous imprisonment was reduced to one year. Sentence of fine alongwith default clause was confirmed. After dismissal of the appeal, the petitioners surrendered before the jail authorities. The petitioners alleged that vide circular dated November 10, 1989, prisoners who were sentenced to undergo imprisonment upto one year were granted two month''s remissions and the prisoners who were, released on bail were also allowed remissions if they surrendered in jail within fifteen days of the receipt of the notice from the superintendent of the jail concerned. Again vide circular dated April 5, 1992, prisoners undergoing sentence upto one year were granted (sic) in jail within fifteen days of the receipt of the notice from the Superintendent of Jail concerned. On various occasions remissions were granted by the Governments but the benefit of the same was not allowed to the petitioners. The petitioners have, thus, filed the present petition under Articles 226/ 227 of the Constitution of India read with Section 482, Code of Criminal Procedure for directing the respondents grant remission to them on the basis of circulars dated May 11, 1979 November 10, 1980. March 28, 1982, November 11, 1989 and April 5, 1992, which could be upto a period of ten months. According to them there was no provision authorising the jail authorities not to extend the benefit of remission to them when particularly they immediately surrendered before the jail authorities to undergo the remaining portion of their sentence.

In the reply filed by the respondents, it was admitted that the petitioners were sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years by the Additional Sessions Judge, Faridkot, vide judgment dated February 29, 1980. and their appeal was dismissed by this Court. Their sentence was reduced to one year by the Hon''ble Supreme Court as per judgment dated February 4, 1993. This fact was denied that the petitioners surrendered themselves to undergo the remaining sentence after the appeal was decided by the Hon''ble Supreme Court and it was maintained that they were arrested by the police of Police Station Bagga Purana on April 14, 1993 and were readmitted in jail to undergo remaining sentence. So far as the question of special remissions announced by the Government was concerned the petitioners were not eligible for the same, as only those prisoner were eligible for the remissions who surrendered before the jail authorities within fifteen days of the decision of the appeal but the petitioners failed to do so and they had to be arrested.

I have heard Mr. V.K. Jindal, the learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. A.R. Sindhu, Deputy AdvocateGeneral, Punjab and have perused the various circulars.

The petitioners have claimed remission on the basis of various circulars, the first of which is dated May 11, 1979, (Annexure R6). According to this circular, remission in the sentence was announced on the occasion of the quincentenary year of the birth of Guru Amar Dass Ji and only those prisoners were entitled to this remission who were convicted prior to May, 11, 1979. The petitioners were convicted on February 29, 1980, so this circular was not applicable at all in their case The .Government again announced remission in the sentence of prisoners on the occasion of the commencement of fifteenth century hijri, the day of Hizrat slet Mohammed Sahib, to the prisoners who were confined in jail on November 10, 1980, and had been convicted by the Civil Court criminal jurisdiction the State of Punjab. Copy of this circular dated December 4, 1980, is Annexure R7 According to this circular, all the prisoners who were convicted before. November 10, 1983, and were subsequently released on bail were also entitled to the remission of one month if the sentence awarded to them was not for more than two years imprisonment Vide Annexure R8 dated April 21, 1982, two months remission was announced to prisoners who happened to be confirned in any jail on March 211982, and were sentenced to undergo imprisonment for not more than two years. The prisoners who were on bail were entitled to the remission only if they surrendered in jail for undergoing the unexpired portion of their sentence. Remissions were granted to the prisoners Vida circulars, copies of which are Annexures R9 End R10 but the benefit of these remissions was available to the prisoners who had been released on bail, only if they surrendered in jail. within. fifteen days of the receipt of Me notice. in this regard from the Superintendent of Jail concerned from where they had been released on bail.

Except in R7, in all other circulars the condition precedent for availing benefit of remission was that the prisoner who had been convicted but was released on bail must surrender within fifteen days to undergo the unexpired portion of his sentence.

Para 637 of the Punjab Jail Manual which deals with the grant of remission is as under :

"Subject to the provisions of paragraph 634 remission under paragraph 635 shall be calculated from the first day of the calendar month next following the date of prisoner''s sentence any prisoner who after having been released on bail or because his sentence has been temporarily suspended is afterwards readmitted in the jail, shall be brought under the remission system on the first day of the calendar month next following his readmission but shall be credited on his return in jail with any remission which he may have earned previous to his release on bail or the suspension of his sentence Remission under paragraph, 635 shall be calculated from the first day of the next calendar month following the appointment of the prisoner as convict warder, convict overseer or convict night watchman."

According to these provisions, a prisoner is not eligible for remission of sentence during the period he is on bail or his sentence is temporarily suspended. A question arose in writ petition (Criminal) No. 669 of 1986 decided on August 27, 1987 by the Apex Court, whether the petitioners who were awarded imprisonment for life but were released on bail during the pendency of their appeal in the High Court were entitled to remission granted during the period they remained on bail, on the occasion of the first visit of the Chief Minister of Haryana to jail and was observed by their Lordships of the Supreme Court that the submission that the petitioners who were temporarily released on bail were entitled to get the remission earned during the period they were under bail was not at all sustainable as such, the remissions that were in a advertently given to those petitioners could not be taken into account in considering the total period of sentence undergone by them while considering their premature release from imprisonment under paragraph 637 of Punjab Jail Manual. it was further observed that as the petitioners did not surrender in the jail for undergoing the unexpired portion of their sentence immediately after their appeal was dismissed by the High Court, so they were not eligible for remission as envisaged in the Government order.

In the instant case, to petitioners were not in jail when the various circulars were issued, granting remissions. Although benefit of remission was allowed to the prisoners who were on bail yet they were required to surrender, to undergo the remaining sentence after the dismissal of their appeal. The appeal of the petitioners was dismissed by the High Court on April 26, 1982; but they were readmitted in jail on July 30, 1982, i.e., after a period of three months. They were again released on bail by the Hon''ble Supreme Court on August 30, 1982, and their appeal was decided on February 4, 1991, but they did not surrender. The Superintendent, Jail, was not competent to issue notice to the petitioners who were granted bail by the Hon''ble Supreme Court to surrender without the orders of the court. It was for the petitioners themselves to surrender themselves in court or before the jail authorities but warrants had to be issued to arrest them. Copies of warrants issued for the arrest of Amrik Singh and Jeet Singh petitioners are Annexures R4 and R5 and in execution of these warrants, the petitioners were arrested on April1 14, 1993, by the police of Police Station Bagga Purana. The petitioners were, thus, not entitled to any remission as claimed.

In the premises aforesaid, this writ petition is without any merit and the same is hereby dismissed