Bikkar Singh vs State of Punjab and ors.

G. S. Chahal, J.

Bikkar Singh who is undergoing life imprisonment after his conviction on November 7, 1981, by means of this petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeks three weeks furlough.

The petitioner pleads that after his conviction, he had undergone six years of imprisonment when he was allowed bail by the Hon''ble Supreme Court of India on December 7, 1984. He was again confined to Jail w.e.f. October 24, 1990. That he has become eligible for furlough as he has earned three annual good conduct remissions and had not committed any jail offence.

In the return filed, the respondents have taken the plea that he has not undergone three years of actual sentence in jail after his readmission in jail on October 24, 1990 and has not earned three annual good conduct remissions which make him eligible for release on furlough.

Sections 4 and 6 of the Punjab Good Conduct Prisoners (Temporary Release) Act, 1962 may be quoted

"4. Temporary Release of Prisoner on Furlough : (1) The State Government or any other officer authorised by it in this behalf may, in consultation with the District Magistrate and subject to such conditions and in such manner as may be prescribed release temporarily, on furlough, any prisoner who has been sentenced to a term of imprisonment of not less than five years, and who

(a) has immediately before the date of his temporary release undergone imprisonment for a period of three years, excluding remissions; and

(b) has not during such period committed any jail offence and has earned atleast three annual good conduct remissions;

Provided that nothing herein shall apply to a prisoner who

(i) is a habitual offender as defined in clause (3) of Section 2 of the Punjab Habitual Offenders (Control and Reform) Act, 1995 or

(ii) has been convicted of robbery or, dacoity or such other offences as the State Government may by notification specify

(2) The period of furlough for which a prisoner is eligible under subsection (1) shall be three weeks during the first year of his release and two weeks during each successive year thereafter.

(3) Subject to the provisions of clause (d) of subsection (3) of Section 8 the period of release referred to subsection (1) shall count towards the total period of sentence of a prisoners.

Case Where Consultation with District Magistrate Not Necessary Or Where Prisoners Are Not To Be Released :

Notwithstanding anything contained in Sections 3 and 4(1) It shall not be necessary to consult the District Magistrate where the State Government is satisfied that the prisoner maintained good conduct during the period of, his earlier release under any of the aforesaid sections; and

(ii) No prisoner shall be entitled to be released under this Act, if on the report of the District Magistrate, where consultation with him is necessary, the State Government or an officer authorised by it in this behalf is satisfied that his release is likely to en danger the security of the State or maintenance or public order".

The contention of the learned Assistant Advocate General is that for the purpose of Section 4(a) the petitioner must have undergone continuous period of three years imprisonment immediately before the date of his temporary release. He thus, wants me to read the word ''continuous'' into the section which will not be justified. On a plain reading of this section, the petitioner has to undergo three years of imprisonment whether with or without break. A break in the present case in the sentence was caused due to the grant of bail by the Hon''ble Supreme Court of India. Since he had not availed of any furlough during the period of his confinement before going on bail he his a right to make a claim for grant of relief of furlough after going back to jail. The period after readmission to the jail is not the deciding factor, but it is the total imprisonment undergone by the petitioner which has to be considered.

I hereby allow the petition and direct that the petitioner be released on three weeks furlough on furnishing of necessary bonds to the satisfaction of District Magistrate, Ferozepur. With this direction, the petition stands disposed of.