IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE 9TH DAY OF JUNE, TWO THOUSAND AND TEN PRESENT HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE A.GOPAL REDDY AND HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO WRIT PEITTION No.8241 OF 2010 Between: Nalabothulu Sundarmaiah and others. … Petitioners And The State of Andhra Pradesh, represent4ed by its Principal Secretary and others. … Respondents This Court made the following: HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE A.GOPAL REDDY AND HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO WRIT PEITTION No.8241 OF 2010 ORDER: - (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice A.Gopal Reddy) Petitioner Nos.1 to 6 filed this writ petition for issuance of a writ of Habeas Corpus by setting the prisoners at liberty forthwith in view of the remission granted by the Government in G.O.Ms.No.190, Home (Prisons-C), Department, dated 07.08.2004. Petitioner Nos.1 to 6 are undergoing imprisonment for life. Admittedly petitioner Nos.1 to 5 have not completed actual sentence of seven years and total sentence of ten years as on the date of issuance of the said G.O., to claim remission. It is alleged in the counter that petitioner No.6 is convicted in S.C.No.74 of 1998 on the file of VII Additional District & Sessions Judge, (FTC), Krishna at Vijayawada, for the offences punishable under Sections 364 and 302 of the Indian Penal Code, with rigorous imprisonment for five years and imprisonment for life. He preferred an appeal vide criminal appeal No.1281 of 2002 and the same was dismissed on 19.01.2005. Therefore, he is not eligible for grant of special remission under the G.O. Further, petitioner No.6 escaped from the police custody on 21.03.2001 at Suryapet, Nalgonda District while he was on transit from Central Prison, Rajahmundry for admission at Central Prison, Cherlapally, R.R.District on medical grounds and still he is absconding. Learned counsel for the petitioners relied upon a decision of the Full Bench of this Court in Indian Association of Lawyers v. Principal Secretary, Govt. of A.P. (FB)[1] seeking remission on the ground that petitioner Nos.1 to 5 were enlarged on bail, while Crl.A.No.263 of 1992 was pending before the Hon’ble Supreme Court, which ultimately was dismissed on 04.12.2000. Therefore, they shall be deemed to have completed seven years and the said period also should be counted for the purpose of calculation of seven years, as held by the Full Bench of this Court in the decision referred supra. The said judgment has been no longer good in law, in view of subsequent decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Joginder Singh v. State of Punjab & Ors.[2]. Therefore, we do not see any merit in the submission advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioners. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. No Costs. _______________ A.GOPAL REDDY, J _____________ RAJA ELANGO, J 9th June 2010 lmv [1] 1994 Crl.L.J.533 [2] 2001 AIR 3703