Uttarakhand High Court
WPCRL/333/2021 on 29 September, 2022
Office Notes,
reports, orders or
SL. proceedings or
Date COURT'S OR JUDGES'S ORDERS
No directions and
Registrar's order
with Signatures
WPCRL No.333 of 2021
Shri Vipin Sanghi, C.J.
Shri Ramesh Chandra Khulbe, J.
Mr. Bhupesh Kandpal, learned counsel holding
brief of Mr. Vipul Sharma, learned counsel for the
petitioner.
Mr. J.S. Virk, learned Deputy Advocate General
along with Mr. Rakesh Joshi, learned Brief Holder for
the State.
The State has filed the supplementary affidavit.
The same is taken on record.
Applicant-Farida Begum has filed this petition for
the following relief(s):-
"Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari
to quash the impugned Rule 7 of the Uttarakhand
(Suspension of Sentence of Prisoners) Rules 2017 to the
extent that rule provides for serving a minimum 4 years
sentence without remission for making a convict eligible for
suspension of sentence in case he / she has been convicted
for offence under murder, robbery, rape, POCSO, treason,
war against State and terrorism related crimes or other
crimes in which a penalty of imprisonment is 10 years or
more (with or without fine) inasmuch as the said condition
is totally arbitrary, ultra vires to Article 14 and 21 of the
Constitution of India."
Interim relief application (IA/3/2022) has been
filed to release the petitioner on parole for a period of
three months.
It is submitted by the learned counsel for the
petitioner that the writ-petitioner is about 74 years
old; she has served more than 4 years in jail; she is
suffering from various ailments such as Type-II,
Diabetes Mellitus, Lumber Disc Disease, Coronary
Artery Disease, and left sided residual hemi paresis
etc.; and, she has to go to higher centre for the better
treatment because her health is deteriorating day-by-
day in the jail.
It is also submitted by learned counsel for the
petitioner that the writ-petitioner does not want to
press the main relief, mentioned in the writ-petition,
at this stage.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well
as learned counsel for the State.
As per the judgment and order dated 23.07.2004
passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Udham
Singh Nagar in S.T. No.147 of 2000, "State Vs.
Farida Begum and others", petitioner has been
convicted and sentenced to undergo life
imprisonment along with a fine of Rs.2,000/- under
Section 302 read with Section 149 IPC, and one
year's rigorous imprisonment under Section 147 IPC.
Assailing the said judgment dated 23.7.2004,
petitioner preferred Criminal Appeal No.235 of 2004,
Smt. Farida Begum v. State, before this Court, along
with other convicts, which has been dismissed by the
Division Bench of this Court vide judgment dated
22.08.2012.
Aggrieved by the said judgment, petitioner filed
Criminal Appeal No.1560 of 2013 before the Hon'ble
Supreme Court. The Hon'ble Apex Court has also
affirmed her sentence vide its judgment dated
04.12.2018.
As regards the parole is concerned, the
application is supported by an affidavit. The medical
reports issued by Sushila Tiwari Hospital, Haldwani
are also on record. According to those medical
documents, petitioner is facing multiple health issues.
Looking to petitioner's old age and nature of
ailment, we are inclined to grant her parole for a
period of 60 days from the date of her release.
Accordingly, the Interim relief application no.3
of 2022 is allowed, and the writ-petitioner is released
on parole for a period of 60 days from the date of her
release, on her furnishing a personal bond and two
reliable sureties, in the like amount, to the satisfaction
of the trial Court concerned.
Needless to say that after completion of 60 days'
period from the date of her release, petitioner will put
her appearance before the jail authority concerned.
The present writ-petition is accordingly disposed
of.
(R.C. Khulbe, J.) (Vipin Sanghi, C.J.)
29.09.2022
SS/RB
