Gurpal Singh v. State Of Punjab And Others
!"
# $%&%!'
( ( ) *
(((
+,*
* *
(((**
-
.) -( * *
//// * ( 0)1
!!" # $ %& &
'( ') *++* !
, -
& *+ '.
!'** / 0 - & &
/ 1'!$ # 2$3 +. '* ** !''( / 1'! $#
/ 4 - , &
!*-
'(& -& *' & & *.- & &5 &
%&
67
& '( ') *++*8
#39%*1"1%!'!1! *.-
*'
& # %*+ & '!& & :
& -& /
/ ! . -
/
- / # 0
/ - / & 5 / &
- && %&
'( ') *++* - - & / /
%& - &&
# %*+& 5 & Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and after perusing the record of the case with their able assistance, the case of the petitioner for pre-mature release has been declined by the official respondents in a most whimsical and capricious manner which does not confirm to the mandate of Article 14 of Constitution of India. The duty to act fairly is incumbent upon every government official specially when, their orders are likely to have effect on the liberty of the convict. he approach adopted by the official respondents is violative of Article 21 of the Constitution of India. $ -
-
-
& !* # $ 3eliance in this regard is placed upon Kamal Kant Tiwari vs. State of Punjab and others 2014(2) RCR Criminal
940. This Court has concluded that even if the convict has committed a jail
#39%*1"1%!'!11 offence, he cannot be denied the relief of grant of pre-mature release in view of the policy prevailing at that time.
In view of the above, the official respondents are directed to consider the case of the petitioner afresh strictly in accordance with the policy applicable to his case within 08 weeks, in case the petitioner is found eligible for pre-mature release, he shall be released forthwith. 0 * 1 '2
5
(i) 95 ; <;
9 <;