Baga Munda vs The State Of Jharkhand And Others
2023 Latest Caselaw 4217 Jhar

                                        1



             IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND, RANCHI
                                        ----

W.P.(Cr.) No. 28 of 2023

----

      Baga Munda                                      .... Petitioner
                                  --   Versus    --
      The State of Jharkhand and Others               .... Respondents
                                        ----

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI

---

For the Petitioner :- Mrs. Rinku Bhakat, Advocate For the State :- Mr. P.C. Sinha, Advocate

----

5/08.11.2023 This petition has been filed for partly setting aside the order

passed by the State Sentence Board dated 20.10.2022 vide Memo

No.11/Prison 05/2021-4265 whereby the prayer for release of the

petitioner has been rejected..

2. Mrs. Rinku Bhakat, the learned counsel appearing on behalf

of the petitioner submits that the petitioner was convicted for the offence

under section 302 I.P.C by the learned Judicial Commissioner, Ranchi in

S.T. No.603 of 2005 by judgment dated 28.08.2006 and 30.08.2006. She

submits that the petitioner has preferred Cr. Appeal (D.B.) No.1520 of

2006 before this Court which was dismissed on 07.10.2017. She submits

that at the time of filing of the present petition the petitioner has

remained in custody 17 years 6 months and 11 days and 24 years 5

months and 25 days including total remission.

3. Mr. P.C. Sinha, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of

the respondent State submits that the case of the petitioner is rightly

considered by the Sentence Review Board and was rejected and the

petitioner has committed a grave offence and as such, the remission

order may not be quashed by this Court.

4. In W.P.(Cr.) No.412 of 2018 it has already been decided that

at the time of crime the policy which was in operation that will prevail

and on the basis of that policy, the remission is required to be considered

by the Government and in the case in hand, it is not disclosed as to

under what policy the policy of 1984 or policy of 2007 the case of the

petitioner has been considered. Further in the case of Laxman Naskar

v. State of West Bengal, (2000) 7 SCC 626, the guidelines were as

under:

(i) Whether the offence affects the society at large;

(ii) The probability of the crime being repeated;

(iii) The potential of the convict to commit crime in future;

(iv) If any fruitful purpose is being served by keeping the convict in prison; and

(v) The socio-economic condition of the convict's family.

5. Any sentence review is required to be considered

considering the above guidelines of the Hon'ble Supreme Court.

6. It appears that by the impugned order this aspect of the

matter has not been taken care of and in view of that, this matter is

remitted back to the respondent authority who will take a fresh decision

in light of the above discussion and further looking into the judgment of

Laxman Naskar v. State of West Bengal(supra), as well as the

judgment passed by this Court in W.P.(Cr.) No.412 of 2018 and W.P.(Cr.)

No.81 of 2022.

7. The said exercise shall be taken place within twelve weeks

from the date of receipt/ production of a copy of this order.

8. W.P.(Cr.) No.28 of 2023 is disposed of.

9. Pending petition, if any, also stands disposed of accordingly.

( Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.)

SI/,