Criminal Misc. No. M-6153 of 2009 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH **** Criminal Misc. No. M-6153 of 2009 Date of Decision:26.05.2009 Gaganjot Singh .....Petitioner Vs. State of Punjab and another .....Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARBANS LAL Present:- Mr. S.S. Rana, Advocate for the petitioner. Ms. Manjari Nehru Kaul, Deputy Adovcate General, Punjab. **** JUDGMENT HARBANS LAL, J. This petition has been moved by Gaganjot Singh – petitioner under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for giving directions to the respondents to release him forthwith on usual terms and conditions as his case has already been considered and recommended by the Government as per Govt. Instructions dated 8.7.1991 and 23.10.2001, but the Hon'ble Governor has rejected the same on the ground that his appeal against conviction is pending in this Court and for giving further direction for his release on bail during pendency of his case. The brief facts are that the petitioner was convicted and sentenced by the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge (Ad-hoc) Patiala on 5.8.2002 in case FIR No.91 dated 8.9.1999 Police Station Banur under Sections 120-B, 302 read with Section 34 of IPC. He has undergone 9 years, 5 months as actual sentence including under trial period and 17 Criminal Misc. No. M-6153 of 2009 -2- years, 5 months as total sentence including remissions. He was eligible for consideration of his case for grant of pre-mature release under the Govt. instructions dated 8.7.1991 and 23.10.2001. Therefore, his case was recommended by the Jail Superintendent for grant of pre-mature release to the Government, which after obtaining report from District Magistrate, Patiala, considered his case and recommended the same for pre-mature release. The Hon'ble Governor, Punjab returned his case to the Government on the ground that the appeal filed by him against his conviction is pending in this Court. The Division Bench of this Court has held in re: Sukhwinder Singh and others v. The State of Punjab, 2008(2) Recent Criminal Reports (Criminal) 659, that the Hon'ble Governor has power to grant pardon even during the pendency of appeal. Since the petitioner has undergone the requisite period of sentence under the Government Instructions and fulfils all the conditions for his pre-mature release, therefore, the action in not releasing him pre-maturely is illegal, arbitrary and discriminatory. Case of the petitioner is also covered by the judgment passed by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in case of Haryana State v. Mohinder Singh reported as 2007(4) Recent Criminal Reports 909. In reply filed by the respondents, it has been averred that the recommended pre-mature release case of the petitioner was sent to the Government vide office letter No.8880 dated 12.11.2008 for appropriate order, which is under active consideration of the Government. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties, besides perusing the record with due care and circumspection. In Annexure P.1 dated 6.1.2009 purportedly issued by the Principal Secretary to Hon'ble Chief Minister, Punjab, it has been mentioned Criminal Misc. No. M-6153 of 2009 -3- as under:- “H.E has passed following orders on file of convict Rajinder Singh s/o Labh Singh, whose case was pending in the Court:- “The advice given by A.G., Punjab is without taking into account the order of Hon'ble High Court passed in the pardon case of Sh. Narain Dutt & others, where the orders of pardon by exercising the power under Article 161 of the Constitution was passed during the pendency of the case in the High Court, but the Hon'ble High Court passed orders in that case setting aside the orders of pardon. I, therefore, suggest that these cases may be reviewed in the light of the orders of Hon'ble High Court passed in the case of Sh. Narain Dutt i.e., cases where an appeal is pending in the High Court should not be submitted for remission.” In re: Sukhwinder Singh and others (supra), the Division Bench of this Court has held that the Governor has constitutional power to grant pardon during pendency of appeal, but same could not be exercised on irrelevant grounds. As follows from the afore-extracted observations from Annexure P.1, the Hon'ble Governor has suggested to the State Government that the cases where an appeal is pending in this Court should not be submitted for remission, though in view of the rule laid down by the Division Bench of this Court in re: Sukhwinder Singh and others (supra), the Hon'ble Governor has constitutional power to grant pardon even during pendency of the appeal which has to be exercised on relevant grounds. Here Criminal Misc. No. M-6153 of 2009 -4- in this case, there appears to be no irrelevant ground. That being so, the Hon'ble Governor without being uninfluenced by the pendency of the petitioner's criminal appeal in this Court can consider the petitioner's case for his release. It bears repetition that the respondents in their reply have mentioned with specificity that the recommended pre-mature release case of the petitioner was sent to the Govt. vide office letter No.8880 dated 12.11.2008 for appropriate order which is under active consideration of the Government. Thus, in the factual scenario, this petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents to dispose of the pre-mature release case of the petitioner within one month from the date of receipt of the certified copy of this judgment and if it is found that he deserves to be released pre- maturely as per rules, he shall be released forthwith. May 26, 2009 ( HARBANS LAL ) renu JUDGE Whether to be referred to the Reporter? Yes/No