HAVA SINGH versus STATE OF HARYANA & ANR.

Citation: [1987] 3 S.C.R. 1061 · Decided: 21-08-1987 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: A.P. SEN · Disposal: Case Allowed
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

} 
HAYA SINGH 
A 
, .. 
STATE OF HARYANA &'ANR 
AUGUST 21, 1987. 
i 
[A.P. SEN AND B.C. RAY, JJ.] 
B 
,. 
Punjab Borstal Act, 1926-pre-mature release of convict after 
seven years' detention under provisions of-Section 5. 
-
The petitioner, aged about 18 years, was convicted for an offence 
u/s 302/34 I.P.C. and sentenced to life imprisonment by judgment and c 
'-( 
order dated 22nd May, 1980, and being admittedly below 21 years of 
age at the time of commission of the offence, was sent to Borstal Institu-
tion in accordance with the provisions of the Punjab Borstal Act, 1926. 
The Petitioner filed this writ petition in this Court, stating that 
-'( 
the total period of detention under-gone by him, together with the D 
remissions earned· by him, came to over ten years, and he was entitled to 
be released both under the Punjab Borstal Act as well as under 
paragraph 516-B of the Pnbjab Jail Manual. The petitioner, there-
fore, prayed for his premature release as provided under the Punjab 
Borstal Act and the paragraph 516-B of the Punjab Jail Manual. 
'<i .. 
E 
"""' 
On behalf of the respondents, a counter-affidavit was filed by the 
Superintendent, Rohtak District Jail, where the petitioner was first sent 
after his conviction and sentence u/s 302/34 I.P.C., and where he was 
'( 
brought again from the Borstal Institute in connection with another 
case and was now being kept, as he had attained the age of 21 years. 
F 
Allowing the writ petition, the Court, 
HELD: The petitioner was sent to Borstal Institute at Hissar as 
he was admittedly adolescent at the time of his conviction, and was 
\ 
subsequently transferred to the District Jail at Rohtak to undergo the 
sentence of imprisonment for life. [1064C] 
G 
It appears from the objects and reasons of the Punjab Borstal Act, 
1926, that the object of the Act is to provide for the segregation of the 
adolescent prisoners from those of more mature age, and their subse-
quent training in separate Borstal Institutions meant for detaining the 
adolescent offenders and for imparting to them industrial training and 
H 
1061 
-
1062 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[1987] 3 S.C.R. 
A subjecting them to such disciplinary and moral influence as will con-
duce to their reformation. [I064C-E] 
Under section 5 of the Act above-said, either a Sessions Judge or a 
Magistrate of first class or a Magistrate specially empowered under 
section 30 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, after convicting any male 
B person, less than twenty-one years of age, of an offence punishable with 
imprisonment for life or transportation or other rigorous imprison-
ment, or in the case of a convict who is ordered to give security for good 
behaviour and he fails to give such security, may in lieu of passing a 
sentence of transportation or rigorous imprisonment pass an order of 
detention which shall not be less than two years and more than seven 
c years when an order is passed by a Court of Sessions or a Magistrate. 
The petitioner, when he was convicted u/s 302/34 I.P.C. and s~ntenced 
to imprisonment for life, was adolescent being less than twenty-one 
years of age and was sent to.the Borstal Institute in accordance with the 
provisions of the Punjab Borstal Act, 1926. On his attaining the age of 
about twenty-one years, he was transferred back to the jail. There is no 
D provision except section 20 in the. said Act for transferring back an 
adolescent convict on his attaining !he age of twenty-one years from the 
Borstal Institute to jail for undergoing the unexpired term of imprison-
men!. On the other hand, under section 5 of the Act an adolescent 
' 
convict under twenty-one years of age, after the expiry of his period of 
detention, has to be released from detention and he is not to be transfer-
E red to jail for undergoing the unexpired period of his sentence of impri-
sonment. Section 20 empowers the State Government to commute the 
residue of the term of detention of an inmate of the Borstal Institute, 
and also order his transfer to any jail in Punjab to complete the said 
term of imprisonment when such an inmate is reported to be incorrigi-
hie or is exercising bad influence on the other inmates of the Institution 
F 
or has committed a major Borstal Institution offence as provided in the 
rules. There was nothing to show that the petitioner had been even 
found to be incorrigible or to be exercising a bad influence on the other 
inmates of the Institution, etc., as stated above, and the State Go
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.