Rutu Munda @ Ritupuran Munda and Ramautar Seth vs The State of JHARKHAND and Others

Hon''ble Chief Justice Prakash Tatia, C.J.—Heard learned counsel for the parties.

This writ petition has been preferred by the two petitioners, namely, Rutu Munda @ Ritupuran Munda and Ramautar Seth, who have been convicted in Sessions Trial No.708 of 1994 by the court of 1st Additional Judicial Commissioner, Khunti vide judgment and order dated 26th March, 1999 and 19th April, 1999 respectively and against which Criminal Appeal (DB) No. 177 of 1999 (R) has been dismissed vide judgment dated 14th July, 2006.

Both the writ petitioners have completed requisite period of sentence for consideration of premature release and, therefore, their cases were referred to the competent Committee, who considered the cases of the writ petitioners and vide decisions taken in the Meeting of the Committee held on 20th May, 2011, 25th May, 2011 and 27th May, 2011 proceeded to reject their prayer.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioner No.1 has completed sentence of 21 years 11 months and 28 days including remission, as on 10th January, 2012; whereas the petitioner No.2 has completed sentence of 22 years 3 months and 19 days including remission, as on 10th January, 2012. It is submitted that the jail authorities have clearly opined that conduct of these both petitioners was very good. However, according to the counsel for the State, Senior Superintendent of Police has raised doubt about these two writ petitioners and apprehended that they may again indulge in the criminal activities.

I have perused the reasons given by the Jail authorities and also the reasons given by the Superintendent of Police, Ranchi, wherein the family conditions of these two accused persons, their parents and their condition of the houses have also been mentioned and merely there is passing remark that they may indulge again in criminal activities, inspite of recording the fact that there is no past record of their criminality and conduct of these convicts were found to be good by the jail authority for such long period of more than 20 years.

In view of the above reasons, it appears that relevant material has not been considered by the Committee and particularly the record of Jail authorities, which is relevant record for the purpose of the conduct of the convicts lodged in the jail as they were under direct control and supervision of the jail authorities. It is, therefore, held that the order passed against these writ petitioners, namely, Rutu Munda @ Ritupuran Munda and Ramautar Seth for denying their premature release is absolutely illegal and, therefore, this writ petition is allowed and respondents are directed to forthwith pass appropriate orders for release of these two accused persons, namely, Rutu Munda @ Ritupuran Munda and Ramautar Seth.