IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl. Misc. No. M- 29083 of 2010(O&M) Date of Decision: December 1, 2010. Lakhi Ram ...... PETITIONER(s) Versus State of Haryana and others ...... RESPONDENT (s) Crl. Misc. No. M- 29515 of 2010(O&M). Lakhi Ram ...... PETITIONER(s) Versus State of Haryana and others ...... RESPONDENT (s) CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAM CHAND GUPTA Present: Mr. Rahul Deswal, Advocate and Mr. H.P.S.Aulakh, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. P.M.Anand, Addl.A.G., Haryana. ***** RAM CHAND GUPTA, J.(Oral) CRM No.M-29083 of 2010 This order will dispose of both the aforementioned petitions filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure for premature release of petitioner in view of judgment of Hon’ble Apex Court in State of Haryana and others v. Jagdish and Harpal, AIR 2010 (SC) 1690 and as per policy dated 04.02.1993, Annexure P1 as both the petitions have been filed for same relief on behalf of same person through different counsel. Reply has been filed on behalf of respondent-State. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the whole record. Admitted facts are that petitioner is undergoing life imprisonment in FIR No.274 dated 24.06.1992, under Sections 302/34 IPC, Police Station Civil Line Rohtak. He was convicted and sentenced by the then learned Sessions Judge, Rohtak vide judgment dated 17.11.1997. His appeal against the said judgment was dismissed by this court. He has already undergone more than 18 years, 4 months and 21 days of actual sentence and 22 years, 11 months and 5 days of total sentence including remissions minus parole. It has been contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that he has already undergone more than 20 years of total sentence as required under policy, Annexure R2 amended vide Memo No. 36/135/91-1JJ(II) dated 16.03.1999 and that as per the same a convict has to undergo total sentence of 20 years including remissions minus parole and however, the case of petitioner has been rejected on the ground that he has not earned 6 years remission. 2 CRM No.M-29083 of 2010 These facts have not been disputed by learned counsel for the State. In view of policy Annexure R2 amended vide Memo No. 36/135/ 91-1JJ(II) dated 16.03.1999, petitioner has to undergo 20 years of total sentence including remission minus parole. Hence, in view of these facts, the respondents are directed 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. Both the aforementioned petitions disposed of accordingly. ( RAM CHAND GUPTA ) December 1, 2010. JUDGE 'om' 3