The State Has Produced Before Us ... vs Unknown
2021 Latest Caselaw 4089 Jhar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                   W.P.(PIL) No. 4412 of 2021
                          ---

Court on its own Motion Versus The State of Jharkhand & ors .... .... .... Respondents

------

CORAM: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD

------

For the State      : Mr. Rajiv Ranjan, A.G.
                      ------
Oral Order

02 / Dated : 29.10.2021

A letter was written by one Miss Aditi Raj dated 08.10.2021

addressed to the Chief Justice.

We have registered this letter as a writ petition.

In the letter she has raised her grievance that her father has been

convicted and is serving his sentence in Birsa Munda Central Jail,

Hotwar, Ranchi. She has also raised issue that the Revision Board

should sit after every three months but it is not sitting regularly. She

has also raised her grievance as to why the case of her father should be

considered for remission by the State authorities.

The State has produced before us notification dated 08.09.2021

and it appears there from that the case of the father of the petitioner

has been considered by the Board and the request for premature

release has been rejected. However, from the reasons which have been

recorded for remission certain question arises, for example, as to

whether the dowry death is within the heinous crime stated in the

policy of the State Government to disentitle such convicts from

consideration of remission? That apart, whether the mandatory

requirements for consideration of the issue of remission have been

followed and adhered to by the State authorities and the Board.

In above view of the matter, we would direct the State

Government to file a response in this matter and bring on record the

proceeding of the Board so far as the father of the petitioner is

concerned.

Let the original records be produced for our perusal.

Let the State also produce the policy decision which was in

vogue at the time when the F.I.R. was lodged against the petitioner's

father and also when the judgment of conviction and order of sentence

was passed as well as the latest policy.

Let the State also come up with an affidavit as to whether any

convict under Section 304-B of the Indian Penal Code has been given

benefit of remission or not in the past.

As prayed, put up this matter on 26.11.2021.

(Dr. Ravi Ranjan, C.J.)

(Sujit Narayan Prasad, J.)

Raman/VK