LexJAI PRAKASH AND ORS. versus STATE OF HARYANA & ORS.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
JAI PRAKASH AND ORS. A v. STATE OF HARYANA & ORS. AUGUST 27, 1987 ~ [A.P. SEN AND B.C. RAY, JJ.] B ~ Punjab Jail Manual: Para 637-Remission of sentence-Govern- ment orders dated 14th August, 1977 and 11/14th January, 1985 and letter dated 24th April, 1985 of 1. G. of Prisons, Haryana-Effect of- .... Whether prisoner eligible for remission of sentence during period of bail or suspended sentence. 1 c """' The petitioner No. 1 and petitioners Nos. 2 to 5, were convicted in two separate incidents for offence under Sec. 302 Indian Penal Code and were undergoing life imprisonment awarded to them. They were directed to be released on bail by the High Court during the pendency of ~ their appeals. The appeal of the first petitioner was dismissed on D 28.9. 78 and he was arrested on 29.1. 79. The appeal of the petitioners Nos. 2 to 5 was also dismissed on 8.12.78 and they surrendered before the Magistrate on 16.2. 79 for serving out the remaining part of their sentence. ~ By an order dated Augnst 14, 1977, special remission was granted E by the Governor of Haryana to prisoners who were in confinement on 1 14th August, 1977 on the occasion of the first visit of the then Chief Minister of the State to jail, and who had been subsequently released on bail. All the petitioners were given remissions of 19 months and 12 days F during the period they remained on bail. The petitioners were informed by the third respondent, by Jetter dated 24.4.1985 to the second respondent that the convicts who were on bail and whose sentences were suspended would be excluded from the ~ remissions purported to have been earned by them while they were on G bail. In the writ petition, the petitioners assailed the guidelines and instructions laid down in the impugned letter as contrary to the provi- sions contained in Para 637 of the Punjab Jail Manual. They contended that since they surrendered themselves before the jail authority after H 1107 1108 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1987] 3 S.C.R. A the dismissal of their appeal by the High Court they were entitled to have the period of remissions earned by them during the period they were on bail to be counted for considering the total period of sentence undergone for their premature release, under the aforesaid para. A counter affidavit affirmed by the second respondent was filed B stating that no remission of period of sentence was permissible under paragraph 637 or any other provision of the Punjab Jail Manual, as applicable in Haryana, for the period that the convict remained on bail or his sentence was otherwise under suspension, that the special remis· sion under State Government orders on visit of Minister for Jails was allowed only to those prisoners who were convicted before the visit and C released on bail subsequently and the convicts surrendered to undergo the unexpired period of sentence and that the petitioners were not enti- tled to the benefit claimed as they had not surrendered in the jail. Dismissing the writ petition, this Court, D HELD: 1.1 The impugned letter of the third respondent is quite in accordance with the Government order made on 11/14 January, 1985 and, therefore, cannot be challenged as in violation of paragraph 637 of the Punjab Jail Manual nor it is contrary to the directions contained in the aforesaid order. [1115B·C] E The remissions that were inadvertently given to the petitioners cannot be taken into account in considering the total period of sentence undergone by them while considering their premature release from imprisonment under para 637 of the Punjab Jail Manual. [1112H, ll 13A] 1.2 On a reading of para 637 of the Punjab Jail Manual, it is F manifest that a prisoner who was released on bail or whose sentence was temporarily suspended and was re-admitted in jail afterwards would be brought under the remission system on the first day of the calendar month next following his re-admission. In other words, a prisoner is not eligible for remission of sentence during the period he was on bail or his sentence was temporarily suspended. [1112F-G] G J.3 The special remission was granted by the order of the Gover- . nor dated 14th August, 1977, to only those petitioners who were in confinement on 14th August, 1977 on the occasion of the first visit of the then Chief Minister of the State to jail, and who had been subse- quently released on bail. It is clear and evident from the letter dated H ll/14th
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.