IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl. Misc. No. M- 26875 of 2010(O&M) Date of Decision: November 29, 2010. Suresh ...... PETITIONER(s) Versus State of Haryana and another. ...... RESPONDENT (s) CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAM CHAND GUPTA Present: Mr. H.P.S.Aulakh, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Amandeep Singh, A.A.G., Haryana. ***** RAM CHAND GUPTA, J.(Oral) The present petition has been filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure for premature release of the petitioner under para 2(a) of policy dated 04.02.1993 on the plea that he has already undergone requisite period of sentence and eligible to be released forthwith. Reply has been filed on behalf of respondent-State. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the whole record. CRM No.M-26875 of 2010 Admitted facts are that petitioner has been undergoing sentence in FIR No.175 dated 21.06.1994 under Sections 342/302/34 IPC, Police Station Sadar Sonepat. He was convicted by the then learned Sessions Judge, Sonepat vide judgment dated 08.10.1996 and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life. He filed appeal before this Court, which was dismissed. As per reply filed on behalf of respondent-State, he has already undergone more than 13 years 11 months of actual sentence and more than 20 years of total sentence including remissions and minus parole as on 30.09.2010. As on today he has already undergone more than 14 years of actual sentence. Premature release case of the petitioner was sent to the Government for consideration by Superintendent, District Jail, Sonepat through Director General of Prisons, Haryana, Panchkula vide letter No. 2628 dated 17.05.2010. It has also been mentioned that premature release case of the petitioner falls under para 2(a) of the policy dated 04.02.1993. However, petitioner has not been released on the plea that he has not earned at least 6 years remission as per policy dated 04.02.1993. It has been contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the policy dated 04.02.1993 was further clarified vide Memo No. 36/135/91- 1JJ(II) dated 16.03.1999, according to which petitioner has to undergo 20 years of total sentence including under trial period and remissions, which he has already undergone and hence, it is contended that merely on the ground that he has undergone actual sentence of more than 14 years and less remissions though total sentence comes to 20 years, it cannot be said that his case is not covered under the policy dated 04.02.1993 which was amended vide memo No. 36/135/91-1JJ(II) dated 16.03.1999. 2 CRM No.M-26875 of 2010 It has been stated by learned counsel for the State that there was no other policy except policy dated 04.02.1993 which was amended vide abovesaid memo dated 16.03.1999. As per the amended policy, petitioner convict was to undergo total sentence of 20 years including under trial period and remissions minus parole, which has already been undergone by him as per the reply filed on behalf of State. Hence, he has become entitled for the release. Hence, in view of these facts, the present petition is disposed of with direction to respondents to reconsider the premature release case of the petitioner in the light of observations of this Court made above within one month from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. ( RAM CHAND GUPTA ) November 29, 2010. JUDGE 'om' 3