IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Writ Jurisdiction Case No.48 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-316 Year-2008 Thana- JAMUI District- Jamui ====================================================== Bittu Rawat S/O Sukhdeo Prasad Rawat R/O Village- Aghara, P.S- Jamui, Distt.- Jamui. ... ... Petitioner/s Versus 1. The State Of Bihar Through The Chief Secretary, Govt. Of Bihar, Patna. Bihar 2. The State Sentence Remission Board, Through Principal Secretary Home Department, Govt. Of Bihar Patna, Bihar 3. The Joint Secretary-Cum- Director Administration Home(Department) (Prison), Bihar, Patna. Bihar 4. The Secretary Law Department, Govt. Of Bihar, Patna. Bihar 5. The Inspector General Of Prison And Jail Reforms, Govt. Of Bihar, Patna. Bihar ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Bhim Sen Prasad, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. Sc.7 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIBEK CHAUDHURI ORAL ORDER 4 15-02-2025 This is a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India filed by an in custody convict praying for premature release on the ground that he has already completed more than 14 years of actual sentence in connection wit SC/ST Case No.60 of 2009 arising out of Jamui P.S. Case No.316 of 2008 under Section 302, 385, 504 of the Indian Penal Code read with section 27 of the Arms Act and Section 3(x) of Schedule Caste and Schedule Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. 2. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that with Patna High Court CR. WJC No.48 of 2024(4) dt.15-02-2025 2/3 remission the petitioner has completed more than 20 years of incarceration in connectional home so his case may be considered by the SSRB for premature release. 3. A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the respondents, in para-10 of the said counter affidavit it is disputed that the accused has completed 20 years of incarceration with remission. Thus, it is contended on behalf of the respondents that his case is not matured for consideration by the SSRB. 4. The learned Advocate on behalf of the petitioner refers to a decision of a Coordinate Bench of this Court delivered on 25.10.2021 wherein a notification bearing No.3106 dated 10.12.2002 issued by the Home Special Department, Government of Bihar was quoted. The learned Advocate on behalf of the petitioner refers to clause-6(iii)([k) wherein it is laid down:- “6(iii)([k) lHkh vU; vkthou dkjkokl dh ltk izkIr iq:’k fl)nks’k canh ifjgkj lfgr 14 o’kksZ dh okLrfod ltk iwjh djus ds mijkUr le; iwoZ fjgkbZ ds fy, fopkj djus ds ik= gksaxsA” 5. Thus, it is submitted by the learned Advocate on behalf of the petitioner that the respondents do have a wrong notion that a life convict must have to spent 14 years actual Patna High Court CR. WJC No.48 of 2024(4) dt.15-02-2025 3/3 punishment and 20 years incarceration with remission. 6. The case is ripe for consideration by SSRB for premature release and the same may be referred to the SSRB. 7. I have considered the submission made by the learned counsel for the parties. Without deciding the issue as to whether the petitioner is entitled to be release at a premature stage before completion of 20 years of custody with remission, the case of the petitioner is referred to the SSRB for consideration. 8. Taking into account the facts and circumstances as narrated in the instant writ petition as well as counter affidavit. The SSRB shall take appropriate decision within 60 days from the date of this order. 9. Accordingly, the instant writ petition is disposed of. mdrashid/- (Bibek Chaudhuri, J) U T