IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl. Misc. No. M-33698 of 2008 Date of Decision: December 22, 2008 Shankar Bahadur … 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. 59443 of 2008 Allowed, as prayed for. Crl. Misc. No. 33698 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. The petitioner was convicted by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Hisar, and vide order dated 2.6.1995, was awarded death sentence which was commuted to the life imprisonment vide order dated 20.9.1996 passed by this Court in Crl. Misc. No. 237-DB of 1995. The fact that the petitioner has Crl. Misc. No. 33698 of 2008 undergone actual sentence of 14 years and 13 days and total sentence of 20 years (as on 26.09.2007) is noticed by the State Level Committee itself in the impugned order. Vide that order, the State Level Committee deferred the consideration of the premature release case of the petitioner by observing that “the premature release of this life convict be deferred for one year as the heinous nature of offence of committing double murder to steal the amount of Rs. One lac from the house of his employer.” The petitioner had to file Criminal Misc. No. 4138-M of 2008 which was allowed by a Coordinate Bench of this Court (Ajay Kumar Mittal, J.) on 28.07.2008 by issuing the direction that the Superintendent of the concerned Jail shall forward the premature release case of the petitioner to the Director General of Prisons for further action in the matter. The Bench noted in that case that the learned State counsel “could not controvert that in view of the Clause 4 of the Government Policy (Annexure P-1), every Superintendent of the Jails is required to forward the case of life convicts for premature release two months before the completion of the requisite sentence, and that accordingly the case of the petitioner shall also be forwarded forthwith to the Director General of Prisons for further action in the matter.” ` The grievance of the petitioner is that no steps have, at all, been taken by the respondents in compliance with the orders dated 28.07.2008. The petition shall stand disposed of with a direction to the Competent Authority to dispose of the premature release case 2 Crl. Misc. No. 33698 of 2008 of the petitioner – prisoner within a period of two months from today. The order shall be FAXED immediately to the District Magistrate concerned who shall pass whatever order he deems fit on the presentation of surety bonds etc. However, in the facts and circumstances of the case noticed in the foregoing paras of this order, it is ordered that the petitioner – prisoner shall be released forthwith, as an interim measure. The release shall, of course, be subject to the furnishing of adequate surety etc. by the petitioners – prisoners undertaking the return to law if so ordered by this Court. It will be for the learned State counsel to communicate the order to the Competent Authority. Copy of this order be given to the learned counsel for the State counsel under the signatures of the Court Secretary. December 22, 2008 ( S.D. Anand ) vkd Judge 3