Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

BALWINDER SINGH @ KAKA SINGH versus STATE OF PUNJAB & ORS.

High Court of Punjab and Haryana, Chandigarh

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Balwinder Singh @ Kaka Singh v. State of Punjab & Ors. - CRM-6061-M-2005 [2006] RD-P&H 12859 (19 December 2006)

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

Crl. Misc. No.6061-M of 2005

Date of decision: January 10, 2007.

Balwinder Singh @ Kaka Singh

...Petitioner(s)

v.

State of Punjab & Ors.

...Respondent(s)

Present: Shri R.S. Bains, Advocate for the petitioner.

Shri B.S. Bath, Asstt. Advocate General, Punjab for the respondents.

Surya Kant, J. (Oral)

In this petition under section 482 Cr.P.C., the petitioner, who is a life convict, seeks a direction to the respondents to consider his case for premature release in terms of Government policy dated 8th July, 1991 and

the subsequent policies.

In response to the notice of motion, reply by way of affidavit dated 17th

January, 2006 of Jagjit Singh, Assistant Inspector General of Prisons, Punjab has been filed. In para 10 of the aforesaid reply, it is averred that "premature release case of petitioner is not due for consideration so for under instructions Pb. Govt. letter dated 08.07.91 or any other instructions because petitioner has not undergone actual 10 years of his substantive sentence and with remission 14 years." It also appears that by the time the aforesaid reply was filed, the petitioner had undergone substantive sentence of more than 12 years 4 months.

Learned Counsel for the petitioner, relying upon the latest custody certificate dated 22.12.2006, contends that by now the petitioner has undergone actual 10 years substantive sentence with remissions 14 years and as such the petitioner has become eligible for consideration of his case for premature release under the Punjab Government policy dated 8th July, 1991 as well as the subsequent policies on the same subject.

After hearing Learned Counsel for the parties and having regard to the afore-mentioned stand taken by the respondents, this petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents to consider the petitioner's case for premature release in accordance with government policies issued from time to time within a period of one month and if the petitioner is found eligible for premature release, make the necessary recommendations to the competent authority within the aforesaid period.

January 10, 2007. [ Surya Kant ]

kadyan Judge


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.