Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

DHARAMVIR versus STATE OF PUNJAB & ORS.

High Court of Punjab and Haryana, Chandigarh

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Dharamvir v. State of Punjab & Ors. - CRM-48093-M-2006 [2007] RD-P&H 173 (9 January 2007)

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

Crl. Misc. No. 48093-M of 2006.

Date of Decision: January 16, 2007.

Dharamvir

....Petitioner

through

Mr. Nandan Jindal, Advocate

Versus

State of Punjab & Ors.

...Respondents

through

Mr. B.S.Baath, AAG, Punjab.

CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURYA KANT.

1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?

2. To be referred to the Reporters or not?

3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? SURYA KANT,J.(ORAL)

The petitioner, who is a life convict under Section 302 IPC, seeks a direction for his premature release on the ground that he has already undergone about eleven years' actual sentence and total sentence of more than 16 years including remissions.

It is averred that after undergoing that much of sentence, the petitioner is entitled for premature release under the Government policies.

The respondents, on the other hand, have taken the stand that since the petitioner had committed some jail offence, his case can not be considered for premature release.

There is no denial to the effect that the alleged jail offence committed by the petitioner pertains to one day's over-stay when he was on parole. It is stated by learned counsel for the petitioner that as his mother was seriously ill, a delay of one day was caused in surrendering before the jail authorities. There is, however, no dispute that no final decision in relation to the petitioner's premature release has so far been taken by the authorities concerned.

After hearing learned counsel for the parties and without expressing any view on the merits of the case, this petition is disposed of with a direction to the Government of Punjab to take a final decision in respect of the petitioner's claim for premature release and while taking the said decision, to ascertain the correct facts in relation to one day's delay in petitioner's surrender after availing parole. If the reason given by the petitioner is correct, it appears too harsh to deny him the benefit of the government policy merely because of one day's delay in surrender after availing the parole. It is directed that appropriate decision in accordance with the government policies shall be taken by the concerned authority within two months from the date a certified copy of this order is received.

Disposed of.

January 16, 2007. ( SURYA KANT )

dinesh 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.