IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl. Writ Petition No. 1344 of 2008 Date of decision: December 23, 2008 Vishwa Nath … Petitioner Versus State of Haryana and others. … Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE S.D. ANAND. Present : Mr. Rahul Deswal, Advocate, for the petitioner. S.D. Anand, J. (Oral) Crl. Misc. No. 580 of 2008 Allowed, as prayed for. Crl .Writ Petition No. 1344 of 2008 Notice of motion. On the asking of the Court, Mr. S.S. Mor, Senior Deputy Advocate General, Haryana, accepts notice on behalf of the State. While disposing of an earlier plea (Crl. Misc. No. M- 39647 of 2007 for his premature release, a Coordinate Bench of this Court (Mahesh Grover, J.) noticed an averment on behalf of the State counsel that the case of the petitioner – prisoner could Crl. Writ Petition No. 1344 of 2008 not be considered as he had not completed 14 years of actual sentence. The petition was dismissed on that premise. The petitioner has presently completed 14 years of actual sentence. He filed representation (Annexure P/4) before the Director General of Police (Prison), Haryana – respondent No.2, which has not been disposed of till date. The learned State counsel states that, on ascertainment of facts, the Competent Authority shall take a decision on the premature release case of the petitioner within one month. The petition shall stand disposed of accordingly with a direction to the Competent Authority to take a decision within one month from today. However, it is apparent from the custody certificate dated 18.12.2008 that the petitioner had undergone actual sentence of 13 years, 03 months and 23 days till the date of issuance of that custody certificate i.e. 18.12.2008. In the light thereof, it is apparent that he has undergone actual sentence of 14 years. Even otherwise he was presently required to undergo actual imprisonment for a period of 10 years and total imprisonment of 14 years in terms of the policy in currency on the date of his conviction on 07.02.1998. In the light thereof, it is apparent that the continuation incarceration of the petitioner – prisoner is violative of the law laid down by the Apex Court in State of Haryana vs. Mahender Singh and others, 2007(4) RCR (Criminal) 909. 2 Crl. Writ Petition No. 1344 of 2008 In the light thereof, the petitioner – prisoner shall be unconditionally released forthwith by the respondent no.3. It will be for the State counsel to communicate the order to the respondents. This order shall also be FAXED to the respondent No.3. Disposed of according direction aforementioned. Copy of the order be given to the learned State counsel under the signatures of the Court Secretary. December 23, 2008 (S.D. Anand) vkd Judge 3