- (1.) In it Criminal Writ Petition, a prayer has been made by detenu for issuance of a writ of Mandamus to the respondents to consider his case of premature release in the light of the light of the instructions of the Punjab Government of 1988 (for short, 1986 Instructions) It is stands in the petition that the petitioner was convicted by the Sessions Judge. Bhatin a under-section 102. Indian Penal Code for life imprisonment on 4.5. 1981. The details of the imprisonment undergone by the petitioner are furnished in his petition a under : According to the petitioner, thus he had undergone much more imprisonment than he was required to undergone under 1986 instructions and also under para 516 B of the Punjab Jail Manual . It is further alleged by the petitioners in his petition that he is 69 years old and also not keeping good health inside the prison.
(2.) It has been stated in the written statement filed on behalf of respondent No. 1 in its para No. 5 that "The petitioner had, up to 26.9.89. undergone actual sentence for 8 years 4 months besides undertrial period. He has earned remission for 5 years 9 months.
(3.) The State Government had not issued any instructions in 1986 for consideration of cases of remission of balance of sentence under Article 161 of the Constitution or under section 432 Code of Criminal Procedure. The provisions of para 516(B) of the Punjab Jail Manual are not applicable in his case. Since he had been convicted after section 433-A. Code of Criminal Procedure was enforced he could not be released on the basis of old age, if any, under the instructions issued on 21.8.86. There is also no certificate from a Committee of three doctors declaring him infirm or incapacitated. Thus, no relief is admissible to him under the instructions dated 21.8.86, Copy of which is placed as R/1.";