H.S.BRAR,J - (1.) IN this petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, read with Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India, detenu Hari Ram prays for his pre-mature release under Article 161 of the Constitution of India.
(2.) ACCORDING to the averments made in the petition, Hari Ram petitioner was awarded death sentence under Section 302, Indian Penal Code, by the Sessions Judge, Ferozepur, which was later on commuted to imprisonment for life by this Court in appeal. Since the day of his arrest, the petitioner has averred in the petition, that his continuously confined in jail. He has undergone more than 8 years 4 months actual sentence and has also earned remissions exceeding six years (This was the position at the time of filing of this petition on August 12, 1991). The petitioner enjoyed parole/furlough on four occasions without any complaint whatsoever against his antecedents/conduct. The petitioner has not committed any jail offence and he has maintained satisfactory good conduct while undergoing the sentence of life imprisonment. In reply to the petition, the averments made by the petitioner as stated in the above Paragraph have not been controverted by the respondents. It has been stated in the reply by Shri B.D. Aggarwal, Joint Secretary to Government, Punjab, Department of Home Affairs and Justice, on behalf of respondent No. 1 that the case of convicting petitioner was considered and rejected by the Government on December 9, 1991. The relevant portion of the reply is reproduced as under :- "Para 2 (a to m) ........... His case was considered and rejected by the Government on 9-12-1991 keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case, tendency to revert to crime and to instigate others to commit crime and reports of the local/district level authorities. Copy of the order is appexed as Annexure R.I. The facts of the case revealed that the convict had murdered his own wife Shanti and son Kishan without provocation. Secondly, the verification carried out a local level revealed that there was apprehension of breach of peace in case of release of the convict. According to the local/District Level Authorities, he could commit some heinous crime. As such, he did not deserve to be released on mercy."
(3.) FROM the reply, it is so revealed that the case of the petitioner has been rejected on two grounds (i) heinousness of the crime, that is the convict had murdered his own wife and son without provocation; and (ii) verification carried out a local level revealed that there was apprehension of breach of peace in case of release of the convict.;