Brutality in murder or shown after death amounts to heinous crime: HC

CHANDIGARH: The Punjab and Haryana high court has said that exhibition of brutality either while causing death or shown after the murder of a victim, in both circumstances, it would fall in the category of heinous crime for the consideration of premature release of a convict.

The high court bench of justice RK Jain while dismissing a plea of a Mahendergarh resident, Raghbir Singh, said that Clause 2(a)(xii) of the 2000 policy of Haryana on premature release of convicts would apply in both the circumstances. The policy refers to ‘murder exhibiting brutality’ under heinous crime category with three parts (i) cutting the body into pieces, (ii) burning the body and (iii) dragging the body, the court said adding that ‘murder exhibiting brutality’ could be before the murder or after the murder. Whether a person is burnt alive for the purpose of his murder or the body of the deceased is burnt after the death causing disappearance of the evidence, it will apply in both the cases, the court had said.

This clause Clause 2(a)(xii) of policy deals with the cases of convicts whose death sentence is commuted to life and the convicts who have been imprisoned for life for having committed a heinous crime. In such type of cases, the convict has to undergo 14 years actual sentence, including the under trial period and 20 years of total sentence, including remissions for seeking premature release.

Singh was convicted of mur- dering one Ramesh in May 1999 by pouring Sulphuric acid on him in Narnaul. The victim had died a day later. Singh was convicted in August 2001 and sentenced to life term. The high court had upheld the conviction in 2010.

The convict had applied for premature release under the state policy, but in September 2016 a state level committee rejected his plea since he had undergone only 11 years of actual sentence and not 14 years. The state had maintained that policy does not anywhere says that it would apply after the death of the victim and would not apply at the time of causing death.

COURT OBSERVATION COMES ON A PLEA OF A MAHENDERGARH RESIDENT SEEKING PREMATURE RELEASE