IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl. Misc. No. M- 15473 of 2010(O&M) Date of Decision: October 25, 2010. Krishan ...... 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. P.M.Anand, Addl.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 in view of order dated 06.07.2009, Annexure P1 in Crl.Misc.No.M- 13667 of 2009, Krishan v. State of Haryana in view of judgment dated 22.03.2010 passed by Hon’ble Apex Court in ‘State of Haryana v. Jagdish’ in Criminal Appeal No. 566 of 2010 (arising out of SLP (Crl.) 6638 of 2009). I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the whole record. It has been contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that he was convicted and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life in FIR No.182 dated 19.06.1995 under Section 302 IPC, Police Station Sadar CRM No.M-15473 of 2010 Rohtak by the then Additional Sessions Judge, Rohtak vide order dated 02.05.1997. Further contends that petitioner was convicted for offence under Section 302 IPC for committing murder of Satbir, who was not a child whereas co-accused Naresh was convicted for offence under Section 302 IPC for committing murder of Narender @Kala, who was a child and co- accused Rameshwar was convicted for offence under Section 302 IPC read with Section 34 IPC for the said murder of Narender @Kala. Further contends that co-accused Kuldeep was also convicted for offence under Section 302 IPC read with Section 34 IPC for committing murder of Satbir, who was not a child alongwith the present petitioner. Further contends that the premature release case of petitioner falls under paragraph 2(c) of the policy of 1993 and hence, the same is to be considered by the State Government as per the decision rendered by Hon’ble Apex Court in State of Haryana and others v. Jagdish and Harpal, AIR 2010 (SC) 1690. Further contends that his case has been wrongly considered by State Level Committee under paragraph 2(a) of the said policy for committing murder of a child for which he was not held guilty. Further contends that on similar facts coordinate Bench of this Court had directed the respondent-State to consider the case of co-accused, Kuldeep under clause 2(c) of the said policy vide order dated 11.10.2010 passed in Crl. Misc. No. M- 755 of 2009. Learned counsel for the State does not dispute these facts. Hence, in view of these facts, the present petition is disposed of with direction to respondents to consider and decide the premature release case of petitioner in the light of above observations made by this Court as per 2 CRM No.M-15473 of 2010 law, Rules and instructions on the point within one month from the date of receipt of copy of order. ( RAM CHAND GUPTA ) October 25, 2010. JUDGE 'om' 3