Criminal Writ Petition No. 30 of 2009 1 In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, at Chandigarh. Criminal Writ Petition No. 30 of 2009 Date of Decision: 29.1.2009 Jarnail Singh …Petitioner Versus State of Punjab and Others …Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA. Present: Mr. Kuldeep V. Singh, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Anter Singh Brar, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab, for the respondents. Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia, J. (Oral) On 12.1.2009, this Court has passed the following order:- “Counsel rely upon order of this Court (Annexure P4). It has been further submitted that in Ekka Ram v. State of Punjab etc. (Criminal Writ Petition No. 839 of 2004) it has been held that powers of Governor of the State under Article 161 of the Constitution cannot be whittled down by a statutory provision like Section 32-A of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985. Annexure P4 further reflects that order passed in Ekka Ram's case (supra) is subject matter of Criminal Writ Petition No. 30 of 2009 2 S.L.P. (Criminal) No. 2496 of 2006. Counsel further rely upon case Surjan Singh v. State of Punjab (Criminal Writ Petition No. 1179 of 2006 decided on 22.2.2007) to say that having undergone for more than eight years the petitioner is entitled to grant of bail till decision of the SLP. On the asking of Court, Mr. Anter Singh Brar, learned Deputy Advocate General, Punjab, has accepted notice of motion. Reply to the averments made in Annexure P5, be filed. Furthermore, learned Director General of Prisons, Punjab, to acquaint this Court regarding the outcome of SLP in which Ekka Ram's case (supra) has been challenged. Case to come up for further hearing on 29.1.2009. Copy of this order be given to Mr. Brar under the signatures of the Reader of this Court for onward transmission and compliance.” General directions have been issued by this Court (Hon'ble Mr. Justice Surya Kant) in Surjan Singh v. State of Punjab (Criminal Writ Petition No. 1179 of 2006 decided on 22.2.2007). The operative portion of the said judgment reads as under:- 11. The workable solution for the interregnum has been effectively devised by another Learned Single Judge of this Court vide order dated Criminal Writ Petition No. 30 of 2009 3 November 8, 2006 passed in Crl. W.P. No.768 of 2005 (Ajaib Singh s/o Jit Singh v. State of Punjab & Ors.) wherein the petitioner, who was a similarly situated convict under the NDPS Act, was ordered to be temporarily released subject to his fulfilling the following terms and conditions:- “(1) Before releasing the petitioner, the concerned Superintendent of Jail will verify the period undergone by the convict and the remissions granted under Article 161 of the Constitution of India and that if after subtracting the period on parole, the convict has undergone the sentence awarded by the court, he shall be released temporarily on bail to the satisfaction of the Chief Judicial Magistrate during the pendency of the Special Leave Petition filed by the State of Punjab in the case of Ekka Ram (SLP (Crl.) No.2496 of 2006) arising from the final judgment and order dated 14.9.2005 passed in Crl. W.P. No.839 of 2004. The convict concerned will be granted the benefit of remission as per the circulars issued by the Government of Punjab under Article 161, after his conviction. Criminal Writ Petition No. 30 of 2009 4 (2) The petitioner will remain on bail during the pendency of SLP No.2496 of 2006 in Hon'ble Supreme Court. If as per the judgment of the Supreme Court, benefit of remissions under Article 161 is not granted, the convict will surrender back in jail for undergoing the unexpired period of sentence. (3) At the time of release on bail, the petitioner will give an undertaking that he will not leave the country without prior permission of the Court and will keep peace and will continue informing the Chief Judicial Magistrate concerned his residential address from time to time.” 12. Following the order dated November 8, 2006 passed by this Court, the operative part of which has been reproduced above, these petitions are also disposed of with a direction that the cases of the petitioners for their temporary release be considered and if they fulfill all the terms and conditions laid down by this Court in the order dated November 8, 2006, they be also temporarily released on bail on the same terms and conditions. The entire exercise shall be done by the concerned Superintendents of Jails as early as possible but not Criminal Writ Petition No. 30 of 2009 5 later than one month from today. Disposed of.” In pursuance of the directions issued by this Court, as per the written statement filed by the Superintendent, Central Jail, Bathinda, convict was taken to the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate for releasing him on bail. The Jail Authorities in compliance of the orders passed by this Court submitted an application (Annexure P2). It is very detailed application in which it has been stated that convict has undergone 11 years three months & ten days including the remissions. Mrs. Dimple Walia then posted as Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mansa, without going into the averments made in the application had dismissed the application and declined to release convict Jarnail Singh on bail on the ground that no special reason has been mentioned by the Superintendent, Central Jaill, Bathinda. Infact, the Superintendent, Central Jail, Bathinda, had complied with the directions of this Court. Let explanation be furnished by Mrs. Dimple Walia, Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mansa, through the District & Sessions Judge, Mansa, as to why in compliance with the directions given by this Court, Jarnail Singh was not released on bail. In the present case, liberty of the petitioner is involved. He is in custody since 15.12.2008. Least it was expected from the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mansa, to have read the judgment of this Court given in Surjan Singh's case (supra) in pursuance of which the Superintendent, Central Jail, Bathinda, had presented the convict along with application (Annexure P2). Be that as it may, the Superintendent, Central Jail, Bathinda, Criminal Writ Petition No. 30 of 2009 6 shall produce the convict before the Court of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mansa who taking into consideration directions given by this Court in Surjan Singh's case (supra) will do the needful. With the observations made above, the present petition is disposed off. (Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia) Judge January 29, 2009 “DK”