Parsotam Lal vs State of Punjab

K.S. Bhalla, J.

Petitioner Parshotam Lal is undergoing life imprison. ment in Central Jail, Jalandhar. He was convicted and sentenced on January 13, 1979, that is, after the enforcement of Section 433A of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, (hereinafter called the Code). His appeal was also dismissed by the High Court. Through present petition he has prayed for his premature release.

The matter regarding premature release of an accused convicted after the enforcement of Section 433A of the Code was considered by a Division Bench of this Court in Ranbir Singh v. State of Haryana etc., 1987(2) Recent CR 268, Criminal Writ Petition No. 4628 of 1985 decided on May 2, 1986, 1987(2) Recent CR 268, in the light of the Supreme Court judgment in Maru Ram etc. v. Union of India and others, A.I.R. 1980 S.C. 2147. It was held that the correct interpretation of Maru Ram''s case is that Section 433A of the Code has a sway over para 516B of the Punjab Jail Manual or similar other executive instructions regarding the early release of the life convicts. These convicts are a class apart and cannot invoke the aid of the instructions incompatible with Section 433A of the Code issued by the Central or State Government prior to December 18. 1978, as per Maru Ram''s case (supra).

The wide powers of executive clemency were also accepted in Maru Ram''s case and it was observed that Section 433A by no means precludes the States adopting as working rules the same remission schemes, which seems to be fairly reasonable, meaning thereby that executive instructions with regard to remissions were possible even after 18th December, 1978, irrespective of the said provision of the Code.

Allegedly, Punjab Government have issued instructions and guidelines even after the enforcement of Section 433A of the Code on the subject. It is admitted in the reply filed on behalf of the respondent that State Government had issued notification on 26th March, 1985. constituting a State Level Committee for the consideration of cases of premature release and mercy petitions under Article 161 of the Constitution and that it had also issued guidelines on 12th December, 1985. Listing grounds on the basis of which requests for pre mature release could be considered on a mercy petition I filed under Article, 161 of the Constitution of India. It is thus clear that after the enforcement of Section 433A of the Code, a life convict can make a mercy petition to the Governor of Punjab for premature release.

In the instant case, the detenu has already made such a mercy petition and the sarne was received in the office of the State Government on 18th February, 1987. In para No. 7 of the reply it is said that the mercy petition of die petitioner has been forwarded to the Inspector General of Prison, Punjab to have it completed and the same shall be considered within reasonable time as and when it is received complete in all respect. In this situation of the matter, particularly when the question of a citizen is involved, the State is required to act promptly and cannot be expected to delay matters indefinitely on technical grounds. Therefore. it is hereby ordered that mercy petition of the petitioner shall be decided within three months. In case the mercy petition is rot decided within three months from today, the detenu shall be released on bail to the satisfaction of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jalandhar. Thereafter if the petition is eventually rejected the detenu shall surrender to the bail bonds before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jalandhar, on receipt of information from the State Government. He will however, be at liberty to challenge the validity of the rejection order through appropriate proceedings. The writ petition is disposed of in these terms.