AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
4 paragraphs · 406 wordsS.C. Malte, J.
The petitioner in this case was arrested on 12.3.1987 and was sent up for trial for offence under Section 302 read with 34 IPC. The Sessions Judge, Jalandhar, by judgment dated 31.10.1987 convicted the petitioner for the said offence and awarded life imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 5,000/. His conviction and sentence was maintained by the High Court.
In the set of these facts, the petitioner now has come up to the Court to seek a direction that his case regarding premature release shall be governed as per the old instructions dated 12th December, 1985. The State, on the other hand, comesforth with the contention that the case of the petitioner shall be governed by the subsequent instructions that were issued on 8.7.1991. According to the new instructions, the petitioner is required to undergo ten years'' actual sentence before he is eligible for being considered for remission or other reliefs. However, as per the old instructions, a period of 71/2 years of actual sentence was found to be enough. The short question, therefore, is which of these two instructions would cover the present case.
In this respect counsel for the petitioner brought my attention to a decision of this Court in Criminal Miscl. No. 7315M of 1992, in which single Bench of this Court on 17th May, 1993, laid down the principle that in such cases, the instructions as were in existence and in force on the date of conviction would be applicable. In that case, there were two sets of instructions, one of 1971 and the other of 1976. The accused in that case was convicted on 7.8.1973. His Lordship observed that the question regarding his premature release shall be considered as per the instructions in existence when he was convicted. That decision has been confirmed by the Supreme Court in Criminal Appeal No. 598, on Ist August, 1995. Therefore, it is now settled position that the instructions that were in force at the time of conviction of the accused would govern this case. Consequently, the case of the petitioner shall be governed by the instructions issued on 12th December, 1985. The authorities are directed to consider the case of the petitioner as per the old instructions dated 12th December, 1985, and his case shall be finalised within one month from the date of receipt of copy of this order. With this direction, the petition is disposed of.
