Crl. Misc. No.M-8430 of 2008 -1- **** IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl. Misc. No.M-8430 of 2008 Date of decision:01.12.2008. Raj Rani etc. ...Petitioners Versus State of Punjab and another …Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE S.D.ANAND. **** Present: Mr. S.S.Rana, Advocate for the petitioners. Ms. Manjari Nehru, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab ***** S.D.ANAND, J. The premature release plea of the petitioner-prisoners came to be declined by the competent authority by recording the following order:- “Whereas the H.E. Governor of Punjab is of the view that Smt. Raj Rani w/o Krishan Kumar has murdered both the husband and son of Smt. Kiran Sharma and she made the life of Smt. Kiran Sharma miscrable. Vishal Sharma, S/o Smt. Kiran Sharma was a child of tender age. As such the loss caused to Smt. Kiran Sharma cannot be lost sight of. Hence Smt. Raj Rani deserves no leniency and her plea for premature release is hereby rejected as per orders of H.E. Governor Punjab.” Learned counsel for the petitioner-prisoners argues that the petitioners are entitled to consideration of their premature release plea on the basis of parity inasmuch as convicts found accountable for triple Crl. Misc. No.M-8430 of 2008 -2- **** murder had already been granted premature release. The attention of this Court in support of that averment is drawn towards the averment made in para 7 of the petition which reads as under:- “That the respondents while considering the case for grant of premature release of female prisoners, who were involved in triple murder case, have released after undergoing 8 years 6 months actual sentence of imprisonment and 9 years respectively. It is submitted that one Amarjit Kaur wife of Kashmira Singh who was involved in triple murder case was released after undergoing 9 years 6 months actual sentence of imprisonment. One Harvinder Kaur daughter of Amarjit Kaur and one Sukhwinder Kaur wife of Balwinder Singh, who were also involved in triple murder cases, were also released after undergoing 8 years 6 months actual sentence of imprisonment. The petitioners who have been involved in double murder case have undergone more than 11 years actual sentence and more than 18 years with remissions, yet the respondents have not released the petitioners on the ground that they were involved in heinous crime.” The plea raised thereby is that competent authority cannot be allowed to act in an arbitrary manner. Learned counsel for the State is not in a position to contest that the corresponding para of the counter does not concede or deny the precise averment made in the course of para 7 of the petition. There can be no dispute with the proposition that authority charged with the responsibility of granting an order of the indicated category, cannot be permitted to act in an arbitrary manner by adopting Crl. Misc. No.M-8430 of 2008 -3- **** adopting one yardstick in case of one prisoner and a yardstick completely opposite thereto in the case of other prisoner. The competent authority has to act uniformally and the exercise of power under reference ought not to be open to the plea of arbitrariness in any manner. In the light of the foregoing discussion, the petition shall stand allowed. The impugned order shall stand set aside. The competent authority is directed to consider the premature release case of the petitioner within fifteen days from today in the light of the observations made by this Court. It will be for the State counsel to communicate the order to the competent authority. Copy of the order be given to the learned counsel for the parties under the signatures of the Court Secretary. December 01, 2008 (S.D.ANAND) Pka JUDGE