![]() The competent authority cannot go by the 1978 guidelines even if it is favouring Jindal as he had rightly examined his proposal.Ī division bench comprising Justice A M Khanwilkar and Justice A R Joshi said, In our opinion, there is no infirmity in the guidelines of 1992 and by no stretch of imagination, the same can be said to be hit by the vice of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. The HC observed in its May 2 order: The guidelines of 1978 have been superseded and are not applicable to prisoners undergoing life sentence and instead the prisoners are governed by the revised guidelines of 1992. He had prayed that the guidelines were in violation of Article 14 of the Constitution of India as the state government had failed to make statutory rules in the last 51 years. Jindal had filed a petition that his plea for premature release be decided as per the guidelines of 1978 as he had completed 22 years of imprisonment. The maximum period of imprisonment, including remissions for an offence of murder committed by the prisoners in a dacoity and murder cases is 22 years, as per clause four of the guidelines. ![]() Jindal had claimed that he was entitled for a premature release as per the home department guidelines of November 16, 1978. ![]() He has undergone 15 years of actual imprisonment, inclusive of the undertrial period and 22 years of imprisonment with remission. Karnataka Prn 1978 Manual And The Karnataka Prn 1978 Trial Period And
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |