Ram Singh vs State of Punjab and anr.

J.S. Sekhon, J.

The petitioner was convicted for the offence under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code on 1851977 by the learned Sessions Judge, Jullundur and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life. As per the written statement filed by Joint Secretary, Home, Punjab the petitioner has undergone 12 years 11 months and 10 days of actual imprisonment including the period of his detention during trial of the case. Besides this, he has earned remission for 9 years and 3 months. His case for premature release has been withheld by the jail authorities on the ground that he has committed three jail offences. On one occasion he was found in possession of 1550 intoxicating pills and on the second occasion he did not complete the allotted labour work. The third offence relates to the assaulting of another prisoner in the spinning section.

Since in the return filed on behalf of the respondents, the dates of commission of the offences were not given, the original record of the prisoner was summoned. Mr. Avtar Singh, Assistant Superintendent, Central Jail, Ferozepur, has brought the original record. A perusal of the same reveals that the offence regarding possession of 1550 intoxicating pills was committed by the petitioner on 1051975 while the other jail offences were committed on 2251980.

In paragraph 516B of the Jail Manual as well as in the instructions of the State Government issued from time to time an incentive has been given to the jail prisoners for keeping good conduct in the jail in order to earn remission in the sentence and for premature release. Thus commission of jail offences by the prisoner in the year 1975 or 1980 would not operate as a bar for his premature release for all times to come because in that case the very purpose of giving incentive to a prisoner to behave properly in the jail would be frustrated. At the most such like punishment for jail offences would operate as a bar for a period of five years and not for all times to come. A single Bench of this Court in Gian Singh v. The State of Punjab, 1989(1) Recent, CR 118 has already held that after the expiry of four years from the commission of last jail offence, the petitioner shall be entitled to premature release.

In the case in hand, the last jail offence was committed by the petitioner in the year 1980 i.e. about 10 years ago. There is no dispute that the petitioner had already undergone more than 81/2 years of actual imprisonment and more than 14 years in all including the remission earned. Thus it appears to be a clear case of discrimination against the petitioner on the basis of notional misconception regarding the misconduct of the petitioner in the jail. He is, therefore, directed to be released prematurely on usual terms and conditions. The writ petition is allowed accordingly.

The original record of the petitioner has been return to Avtar Singh, Assistant Superintendent, Central Jail, Ferozepur.