Page No.# 1/5 GAHC030003692025 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : W.P.(Crl.)/3/2025 Sh. Khamliana S/o Hmehnuaia (L) Alias Hmelmawia (L) Tuirial Airfield, Aizawl VERSUS The State of Mizoram Aizawl Advocate for the Petitioner : Mrs. Emily L. Chhangte (Legal Aid Counsel) Advocate for the Respondent : P.P./Addl.PP, Mizoram BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE MARLI VANKUNG HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV KUMAR SHARMA ORDER Date : 15-10-2025 (Marli Vankung, J) Heard Mrs. Emily L. Chhangte, learned Legal Aid Counsel for the petitioner along with Mrs. Linda L. Fambawl, learned Public Prosecutor for the State respondent. 2. This is a jail petition filed by the petitioner through the Special Superintendent Central Jail, Aizawl, wherein the petitioner, was aggrieved by the decision of the State Level Committee in its meeting held on 07.10.2022 and Page No.# 2/5 26.03.2025 had rejected the premature release of the petitioner, on his conviction under Section 302 IPC in Criminal Trial No. 769/2005, wherein he was sentenced to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 10,000/- by the Addl. District & Session Judge-III, Aizawl Judicial District, Aizawl. 3. Mrs. Emily L. Chhangte, learned Legal Aid Counsel submits that on perusal of the meeting minutes dated 26.03.2025, the State Level Committee On Premature Release of Life Prisoners, had held as follows:- “There are 9 (nine) life convict prisoners to be considered namely:- 1. MD Mister s/o MD Hussain, Mahari, Bihari 2. Khamliana s/o Hmelmawia (L), Falam, Myanmar 3. Pakchauh @ Lalrozama s/o Demoni, Ngengpuikai, Lawngtlai District 4. Laltanpuia s/o Lalnuntluanga, Salem Veng, Aizawl 5. Lalrinfela s/o Abdula, Kolasib 6. C. Vanlalhruaia s/o Lalthlengliana, Khuangleng 7. Lalrochhunga s/o Tawklala, Sailulak Vengthar, Serchhip District 8. Thawmliana s/o Bualtuma, Lungzarhtum 9. Lallawmsanga s/o Kapthianga, Khawzawl After careful and thorough deliberation of the agendas one by one with the available documents, the committee, in order to avoid the circumstances that may lead to the outbreak of retribution and backlash from victims circles and Page No.# 3/5 also for public interest, and in line with police enquiry reports, unanimously denied the premature release of the aforementioned life convicted prisoners this time. The Committee referred their cases to be re-considered at the earliest convenient time.” 4. She submitted that the meeting minutes is very general, wherein all the 9 (nine) convicts have been denied premature release without any reasons highlighted for each individual convict. The learned Legal Aid Counsel therefore prayed that the matter may be remanded back to the State Level Committee to consider the case of the petitioner individually and pass a reasoned order for the Committee to consider the case of the petitioner and allow his premature release, since he has been incarceration for more than a period of 20 years and his case deserved to be favourably considered. 5. Mrs. Linda L. Fambawl, learned Public Prosecutor in all fairness submits that on perusal of the minutes of the meeting dated 26.03.2025 held by the State Level Committee On Premature Release of Life Prisoners, it is not a reasoned order, wherein the case of the 9 (nine) life convicted prisoners placed before the committee have been decided by a common order without any explanation or reason for rejecting the pre mature release of each individual life convicted prisoner. The learned Public Prosecutor further submitted that a Coordinate Bench of this court in Crl.A. No. 9/2017(j) dated 13.06.2017 had forwarded to the Commissioner & Secretary, Home Department, the application made by the petitioner for remission, commutation and suspension of sentence imposed upon him in accordance with law as provided under the CrPC. She therefore Page No.# 4/5 submitted that as submitted by the learned Legal Aid Counsel, the matter may be remanded back to the State Level Committee for considering the case of the petitioner individually. 6. We have considered the submissions made by the learned Legal Aid Counsel and the learned Public Prosecutor. We have also perused the documents on record. 7. On perusal of the order made by this court in Crl.A. No. 9/2017(j) dated 13.06.2017, it is seen that the petitioner had filed an application dated 23.03.2017, praying for mercy and reduction of terms of his conviction and the sentence imposed upon him. Thereafter, a Coordinate Bench of this court had directed the Registry to forward the application dated 22.03.2017 to the Commissioner & Secretary, Home Department to consider the application of the petitioner as provided under the Civil Procedure Code for remission, commutation and suspension of the sentence imposed upon the accused applicant/petitioner. Accordingly, the State Level Committee On Premature Release of Life Prisoners had decided the case of the petitioner in its meeting held on 26.03.2025. 8. We have also perused the minutes of the meeting of the State Level Committee premature release of life prisoners dated 26.03.2025, wherein we find that the committee, without giving any reasoned order, had considered and disposed of the application of 9 (nine) life convicted prisoners, by passing a common order, denying the pre-mature release of the 9 (nine) convicted Page No.# 5/5 prisoners without any in-depth discussion and without giving a separate reason as to why the application of an individual convicted prisoner was rejected. It is also noted in the minutes of the meeting, that the committee had referred their cases to be reconsidered at the earliest convenient time. 9. In view of the above, this court find it appropriate, in the interest of justice, that the State Level Committee On Premature Release of Prisoners should give an individual consider to the application made by the petitioner, who has prayed for his premature release since the total incarceration period spent by him in jail is said to be more than 20 years, on his conviction under Section 302 IPC in Crl.Tr. No. 769/2005 dated 28.02.2011 and to dispose of the same with a reasoned order within a period of an outer limit of 1 (one) month from the date of receiving a certified true copy of this order. 10. Accordingly, W.P.(Crl.) No. 3/2025 stands disposed of as above. JUDGE JUDGE Comparing Assistant