Khushal Singh vs State of Punjab and anr..

K.S. Bhaila, J.

Kulwant Singh who is confined in Central Jail Patiala was convicted under section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life in the year 1976 by Sessions Judge, Sangrur. This criminal writ Petition has been filed for his unconditional release forthwith contending that his case for premature release was wrongly rejected and the said order of State Government deserves to be quashed.

In the return filed on behalf of the respondents, it is admitted that Kulwant Singh had undergone 10 years 7 months and 24 days actual sentence and had earned remissions for 9 years one month and 19 days upto 11th February, 1987. Since thereafter Kulwant Singh has been continuously confined in Jail and it is nobody''s case if he ever was released. Thus clearly Kulwant Singh has already undergone sentence of more than 21 years including remissions.

Claim of petitioner Khushal Singh on behalf of convict Kulwant Singh is that in the light of Paragraph 516 (B) of the Punjab Jail Manual read with instructions issued by the State Government on 1251977 and 29.12.1986 annexures P1 and P2 respectively, laying guidelines for release of convict like the one in hand, Kulwant Singh was entitled to be released having already completed much more than 14 years sentence including remissions. It is not disputed that case of Kulwant Singh is ripe for consideration and perhaps that is why the same was recommended by the Jail Superintendent. Keeping in view law enunciated by the Supreme Court in Lale v. State of U.P., 1987 SCC (Cr.) 224 and Cri. Writ Petition No 272 of 1985, Bachan Singh v. State (Delhi Administration) annexure P3 decided on 27.51986 a convict who has already undergone more than 15 years of imprisonment including remissions should normally be released from jail unless the State authorities have very strong reasons not to do so. The last rejection order dated 2341987 of petitioner Kulwant Singh annexure P 5 does not provide any such reason. It is simply mentioned therein that there are no extenuating circumstances or other compassionate grounds to warrant his premature release. It is further stated therein that Government, have taken into consideration all the relevant facts and circumstances (without indicating what those facts and circumstances are), is satisfied that it is not a fit case where remission should be granted at this stage. This does not make any one wiser with regard to the circumstances which weighed with the government. No reference has been made to the grounds pleaded by the convict nor any reasons has been afforded for rejecting the some. The rejection order is practically silent as to why Kulwant Singh was considered to be not entitled to the premature release. More than one year has passed thereafter. In the return, reference has been made to standing enmity between two parties. However, that cannot be genuinely considered to be relevant in the light of the admission that two coaccused namely Gopal Singh and Chinder Singh have already been prematurely released. Gopal Singh out of them is brother of Kulwant Singh admittedly and thus the so called standing enmity worked at the same footing against him. When Gopal Singh in the same case with one Chinder Singh have already been released prematurely by the State Government, rejection of the case of Kulwant Singh cannot be taken to be fully justified.

For the foregoing reasons, I allow this petition and direct respondent No. 1 State of Punjab to release convict Kulwant Singh from the jail forthwith.