Harbhajan Singh vs State of Punjab and anr.

Jai Singh Sekhon, J.

The mercy petition filed by the detenu was considered and rejected by the State Government vide its order, dated 17th October, 1989 by taking into consideration the circumstances which resulted in the commission of the murder of Ajit Singh. It was further held that the detenu is not entitled to remission of sentence in the mercy petition on compassionate grounds also as he has three grown up children to look after his domestic affairs.

Through this writ petition under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India, the detenu has sought his premature release on the ground as per the instructions issued by the State Government from time to time, the circumstances in which the crime was committed or other compassionate grounds are of no consequence if the petitioner had undergone more than, 81/2 years of actual sentence and 14 years in all including remission.

In the return filed by respondent, it is not denied that the petitioner had undergone more Than 81/2 years of actual sentence besides more than 14 years including remissions.

I have heard the learned counsel for the parties.

The executive instructions dated 12121985, annexure P3, issued by the State Government reveal that the mercy petitions submitted to the Governor of Punjab are to be examined by the State Level Committee and recommendations made to the State Government on the following considerations :

"1. On ground of serious illness that could prove fatal due to continuous detention in jail;

Fixation of responsibility of a particular life convict in gang murder where others are also involved besides the convict who has submitted the mercy petition.

The aspect of young/adolescent age, sex mental deficiency, grave or sudden provocation and absence of motive and premeditation should also be the factors while scrutinising the copies of the judgments in mercy petition cases.

The old age beyond 70 years can also be one of the factors to grant mercy.

On extreme compassionate grounds like no breadearner of the family and no support from different relations. This will, however, differ from individual to individual.

After introduction of Section 433A of Cr.P.C. w.e.f. 18.12. 1978 since every premature release case of a life convict will be taken up after he has completed 14 years actual sentence in a jail, a minimum period of 5/6 years for juvenile and women prisoners and 71/2 and 81/2 years for adult male prisoners can be taken as one of the guidelines for release on mercy petition.

Cases where subsequent to the announcement of the judgment new facts have come to light which if known to the Court at the relevant time would have resulted in acquittal of convict and where, the proceedings cannot be reopened according to law.

The persual of the above instructions leaves no doubt that ground No. 6 is independent than the other grounds provided for premature release of the prisoners on compassionate reasons. Thus compassionate grounds or the circumstances under which the crime was committed are altogether irrelevant for considering the mercy petition of the prisoner for premature release if he had undergone the requisite actual imprisonment i.e. 81/2 years and 14 years in all including remission.

No doubt, it is the sole domain of the State Government or the Central Government to accept or reject the mercy petition of the prisoner yet all the same, the State is expected to apply uniform standards or norms in considering the mercy petitions of the life convicts. As a matter of fact, the State Government had laid down such norms in the above referred instructions as well as other instructions issued from time to time.

It appears to be a clear case of a nonexercise of the discretionary power in dismissing the mercy petition on extraneous considerations which has resulted in discrimination in violation of Article 14 of the Constitution. Thus, it appears to be a fit case where the prisoner should be directed to be released prematurely by accepting this writ petition. It is ordered accordingly. The concerned authority shall release the petitioner prematurely on the requisite terms and conditions.