IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
Crl. Misc. No. M-34022 of 2008
Date of Decision: December 23, 2008
Harnek Singh @ Nek Singh.
... Petitioner
Versus
State of Haryana and others.
... Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.D. ANAND.
Present : Mr. Jagjit Gill, Advocate,
for the petitioner.
S.D. Anand, J. (Oral)
Crl. Misc. Nos. 60028 & 60029 of 2008
Allowed, as prayed for.
Crl. Misc. No. M-34022 of 2008
An earlier plea (Crl. Misc. No. M-37094 of 2007) filed by
the petitioner came to be allowed by a Coordinate Bench of this
Court (Surya Kant, J.) on 15.11.2007 by passing the following order:-
“This petition is disposed of in terms of the order dated
February 22, 2007 passed in Crl. W.P. No. 1179 of 2006
(Surjan Singh vs. State of Punjab).
Crl. Misc. No. M-34022 of 2008 2
In Surjan Singh’s case (supra), the Bench noticed that
though the judgment in Criminal Writ Petition No.839 of 2004 (Ekka
Ram Vs. State of Punjab etc.) had been appealed against, there was
an urgency in the disposal of the relevant pending cases because if
the view taken by the learned Single Judge of this Court [in Ekka
Ram’s case (supra)] was approved by the Apex Court at a later date,
the petitioners might have completed the entire period of sentence
awarded to them in the meantime. That would have rendered the
petitions infructuous. It was in the light thereof that the following
conditional order was passed by the Single Judge in this case:
“(i) Before releasing the petitioner, the concerned
Superintendent of Jail will verify the period undergone by
the convict and the remissions granted under Article 161
of the Constitution of India and that if after subtracting the
period on parole, the convict has undergone the sentence
awarded by the Court, he shall be released temporarily
on bail to the satisfaction of the Chief Judicial Magistrate
during the pendency of the Special Leave Petition filed by
the State of Punjab in case Ekka Ram [SLP (Crl.) No.
2496 of 2006] arising from the final judgment and order
dated 14.09.2005 passed in Criminal Writ Petition No.
839 of 2004. The convict concerned will be granted the
benefit of remission as per the circulars issued by
Government of Punjab under Article 161, after his
conviction.
Crl. Misc. No. M-34022 of 2008 3
(ii) The petitioner will remain on bail during the pendency of
S.L.P. No. 2496 of 2006 in Hon’ble Supreme Court. If as
per the judgment of the Supreme Court, benefit of
remissions under Article 161 is not granted, the convict
will surrender back in jail for undergoing the unexpired
period of sentence.
(iii) At the time of release on bail, the petitioner will give an
undertaking that he will not leave the country without prior
permission of the Court and will keep peace and will
continue informing the Chief Judicial Magistrate
concerned his residential address from time to time.”
The grievance of the petitioner – prisoner is that the
Competent Authority has not complied with the orders passed by this
Court in Crl. Misc. No. M-37094 of 2007 in view of an administrative
order dated 28.06.2006 which had been issued by the Director
General of Prison, Haryana, directing all the Superintendent of Jails
in the State of Haryana to refrain from releasing the convicts under
the N.D.P.S. Act in view of the embargo created by the provisions of
Section 32-A of the N.D.P.S. Act.
The precise grievance is that an administrative order
cannot be allowed to set at naught a judicial order passed by this
Court.
Notice of motion.
On the asking of the Court, Mr. S.S. Mor, Senior Deputy
Advocate General, Haryana, accepts notice on behalf of the State.
Crl. Misc. No. M-34022 of 2008 4
There can be no dispute with the proposition that an
administrative order, issued at whatever level, cannot be said to be
valid enough to set at naught an order passed by this Court on the
judicial side. Once the conditional release of the petitioner had been
ordered by a Single Bench of this Court in Crl. Misc. No. M-37094 of
2007, the implementation of the order could be denied or deferred
only on the basis of an order passed by the Apex Court.
Concededly, the order dated 15.11.2007 passed by a Coordinate
Bench of this Court has not been appealed against till date.
In that view of things, it is illogical for all concerned to
deny the implementation of that judicial order.
The petition shall stand disposed of accordingly with a
direction to the respondents (all of them) to implement the order
dated 15.11.2007 passed by a Coordinate Bench in Crl. Misc. No. M-
37094 of 2007 forthwith. Any delay on their part in implementing that
order would invite a contempt charge. It will be for the State counsel
to communicate the order to the Competent Authority. This order
shall be FAXED to the respondent no.3 for compliance.
Copy of the order be given to the learned State counsel
under the signatures of the Court Secretary.
December 23, 2008 ( S.D. Anand) vkd Judge