IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl. Misc. No. M-34449 of 2008 Date of Decision: December 24, 2008 Jasbir … Petitioner Versus State of Haryana. … Respondent CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE S.D. ANAND. Present : Mr. Vijay K. Jindal, Advocate, for the petitioner. S.D. Anand, J. (Oral) Crl. Misc. Nos. 60617 & 60618 of 2008 Allowed, as prayed for. Crl. Misc. No. M-34449 of 2008 The grievance of the petitioner – prisoner is that in spite of the direction given by this Court in Crl. Misc. No. M-24034 of 2008, directing the Competent Authority to dispose of the premature release case of the petitioner in the light of the Mahender Singh’s case, within one month from the date of the order, the matter has not been disposed of by the Competent Authority. 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. Crl. Misc. No. M-34449 of 2008 The learned State counsel states that needful will be positively done within one month from today. There is no controversy otherwise that a review plea filed by the State of Haryana in Mahender Singh’s case (supra) has been dismissed by the Apex Court. In Mahender Singh’s case, the Apex Court had held that the policy in currency on the date of conviction of a prisoner would govern consideration of a premature release plea. The petitioner before this Court having been convicted on 05.10.1996, his case has to be governed by the policy which was in force on the date of his conviction. On ascertainment of the correctness of the averment made by the petitioner qua the period of actual sentence undergone by him, the Superintendent of the Jail concerned (where the petitioner is presently lodged), shall unconditionally release him forthwith. This order shall be faxed to the Superintendent Jail concerned. In order to avoid any ambiguity, it is made clear that the petitioner shall be unconditionally released only if the Superintendent of Jail concerned finds that the petitioner – prisoner has indeed undergone the actual period of sentence which he was required to undergo under the policy in currency on the date of the conviction. The petition shall stand disposed of accordingly. The Competent Authority is directed to dispose of the premature release plea of the petitioner – prisoner in the light of the Apex 2 Crl. Misc. No. M-34449 of 2008 Court judgment in Mahender Singh’s case (supra) and a Division Bench judgment of this Court in Jiya Lal’s case (supra) within one month from today. It will be for the State counsel to communicate the order to the Competent Authority. Copy of the order be given to the learned State counsel under the signatures of the Court Secretary. Copy of the order be given dasti to the learned counsel for the petitioner on payment of usual charges. December 24, 2008 ( S.D. Anand ) vkd Judge 3