R.P.NAGRATH,J. - (1.) WHILE hearing the instant Criminal Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, learned Single Judge recorded discordant note to the earlier judgments passed by this Court on specific issues and referred the matter to the larger Bench by formulating following two questions: 1. Whether the petitioner is entitled to release under the Probational Release Act in the year 2012 when the Act itself has been repealed by State of Haryana in the year 2001?Criminal Writ Petition No.30 of 2012 2 2. Whether the petitioner who has been convicted for an offence under Section 304-B IPC is entitled to release under the provisions of the Probational Release Act and the rules framed thereunder ? " This is how the matter is before us.
(2.) THE matter arose on a petition for quashing the order dated 16.11.2011 Annexure P/8, passed by respondent No.1 deciding the prayer of petitioner for conditional release on licence under Good Conduct Prisoners' Probational Release Act,1926 ( in short the 'Act of 1926') read with Good Conduct Prisoners' Probational Release Rules, 1927 ( for brevity the 'Rules of 1927') . The petitioner was convicted of the offences punishable under Sections 304-B and 498-A of the Indian Penal Code ( in short "IPC ") in FIR No.337 dated 24.5.1994 and sentenced to undergo 10 years rigorous imprisonment under Section 304-B IPC and two years rigorous imprisonment with a fine of Rs.200.00 under Section 498-A IPC vide judgment and order dated 19 th /21 st October, 1995 of the trial Court. The appeal preferred against that judgment was dismissed by this Court on 15.05.2009 and the S.L.P. before the Hon'ble Supreme Court was also dismissed vide order dated 3.5.2010.
(3.) THE petitioner had undergone sentence of 4 years 3 months and 14 days which includes 6 months remissions granted under Section 432 Cr.P.C., out of the awarded sentence of 10 years. Earlier the petitioner filed Criminal Writ Petition No.1104 of 2011 titled Satbir Singh V. State of Haryana before this Court. That petition was allowed partly vide judgment dated 27.7.2011 ( Annexure P/7), the operative part of which reads as under : "Consequently, the petitioner is entitled to get hisCriminal Writ Petition No.30 of 2012 3 case considered for conditional release under the Act if he satisfies the conditions for conditional release under the Act before the Act was repealed. Non existence of infrastructure cannot be a ground to decline the aforesaid benefit to the petitioner, if he is otherwise entitled to the same under the Act. The State cannot abdicate its responsibility to provide statutory benefit to any citizen on the ground of lack of infrastructure. It is the duty of the State to create necessary infrastructure for implementation of the statutory provisions. For the reasons aforesaid, the instant writ petition is allowed partially and respondents are directed to consider the case of the petitioner for conditional release under the provisions of the Act and the Rules framed thereunder within a period of three months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order and pass appropriate order in accordance with law. " ;