SADHU SINGH RODA S/O BUTA SINGH ETC. versus STATE OF PUNJAB

SADHU SINGH RODA S/O BUTA SINGH ETC. versus STATE OF PUNJAB

Para 516-B of the Punjab Jail Manual is not a statutory rule but consists of executive instructions, which the State Government may amend or replace from time to time. Since the petitioners have not had their sentences commuted by formal order under law, and since the 1971/1976 executive instructions are valid and applicable to all such cases, the petitioners cannot demand pre-mature release merely by fulfilling the conditions of para 516-B. The distinction recognized by the State in the application of the 1976 instructions to convicts whose sentences have been commuted is not impermissible discrimination as such cases form a distinct class.

Parties
Petitioner: Sadhu Singh Roda S/o Buta Singh etc.; Respondent: State of Punjab
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
25 January 1984
Procedural Posture
Writ Petition (criminal) Nos. 64 to 70 of 1983 Under Article 32 of the Constitution of India / Supreme Court Original Jurisdiction (final Decision)
Outcome
Two writ petitions allowed; five writ petitions dismissed.
Legal Topics
Life Imprisonment, Remission of Sentence, Pre Mature Release, Executive Instructions Vs. Statutory Rules, Equal Protection Under Article 14
Criminal Law Prison Law Constitutional Law Life Imprisonment Remission of Sentence Pre Mature Release Executive Instructions Vs. Statutory Rules Equal Protection Under Article 14

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Sadhu Singh Roda S/o Buta Singh etc.

Petitioner

State of Punjab

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Writ Petition (criminal) Nos. 64 to 70 of 1983 Under Article 32 of the Constitution of India / Supreme Court Original Jurisdiction (final Decision)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether para 516-B of the Punjab Jail Manual is a statutory rule or an executive instruction subject to amendment by executive instructions.
  2. 2 Whether the 1971 and 1976 executive instructions of the State Government validly override para 516-B regarding the consideration for pre-mature release of lifers.
  3. 3 Whether discrimination exists between prisoners whose death sentences have been commuted and those straightaway sentenced to life imprisonment in regard to pre-mature release.

Ratio Decidendi

Para 516-B of the Punjab Jail Manual is not a statutory rule but consists of executive instructions, which the State Government may amend or replace from time to time. Since the petitioners have not had their sentences commuted by formal order under law, and since the 1971/1976 executive instructions are valid and applicable to all such cases, the petitioners cannot demand pre-mature release merely by fulfilling the conditions of para 516-B. The distinction recognized by the State in the application of the 1976 instructions to convicts whose sentences have been commuted is not impermissible discrimination as such cases form a distinct class.

Court Disposition

Two writ petitions allowed; five writ petitions dismissed.

Orders

  • Writ of Mandamus issued directing that the cases of Jang Singh s/o Bagga Singh and Mukhtiar Singh s/o Harnam Singh be submitted for consideration of pre-mature release forthwith without any delay.
  • The remaining writ petitions are dismissed.