Dismissed

Mahendra Hembram v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC5 Aug 2022WPCRL/84/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This judgment dismisses a writ petition seeking prerogative of mercy/remission against State of Odisha. The court relies on a precedent stating that a life convict does not acquire a right to release earnings through Government policy application and that the case was duly considered and rejected by the Board on grounds of crime brutality.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition dismissed; no scope for further consideration under the present order.

Mahendra Hembram Vs State of Odisha — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Orissa HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶2

WPCRL No.84 of 2021

¶3

Mahendra Hembram

¶4

..……. Petitioner

¶5

Mr. H.S. Deo, Adv. -Versus- State of Odisha & others ..…….. Opp. Parties

¶6

Mr. S.S. Kanungo, AGA

¶7

CORAM:

¶8

JUSTICE S. TALAPATRA JUSTICE M.S. SAHOO

ORDER

05.08.2022

Order No.

1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Arrangement (Virtual/ Physical Mode).

¶14

2. Heard Mr. H.S. Deo, learned counsel appearing for the

¶15

petitioner and Mr. S.S. Kanungo, learned Addl. Government Advocate for the Opp. Parties-State.

¶16

3. On 18.07.2022, the State has filed their short counter affidavit, stating, inter alia, as follows:

¶17

“8. That the relevant portion of Section-433-A Cr.P.C. under “Notes” is reproduced below:-

¶18

By earning remission under Government policy a life convict does not acquire a right of release. He could be said to have earned only a right to have his case put up in time before the authorities for considering exercise of power under Article-161 of Constitution of India. Life

¶19

¶20

convict cannot claim that his case for premature release should be considered according to policy/instruction of Government which was in force on the date of his conviction: State of Haryana and others V. Balwan etc. (1999) 17 OCR (SC) 593.

¶21

9. That accordingly, the case of the petitioner was considered by the Board taking into account the brutality and gravity of his crime as per the illustrated categories as per Law Department Resolution and rejected his case on

¶22

different sittings on 24.11.2016, 24.06.2019, 24.12.2020 & 12.01.2022 on the ground of “triple murder including two minor children”. A copy of the proceeding of the last Board meeting dated 12.01.2022 is filed herewith as ANNEXURE-A/3.”

¶23

4. In view of the above decision, we do not find any scope for further consideration. Accordingly, the writ petition stands dismissed. However, this dismissal will not stand in the way of the petitioner to file a fresh petition.

¶24

(S. Talapatra) Judge

¶25

(M.S. Sahoo) Judge

¶26

Subhasis

¶27

¶28

Mahendra Hembram v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mahendra Hembram v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Banka @ Gopabandhu Vs State

Kumkum Ghosh Vs Hara Prasad Ghosh

Dr.Satyabrata Pattnaik Vs State of Odisha

Rama Ch.Behura Vs State and Ors.

M/S.Maa Girija Ispat Vs Oerc

Debitosh Manna Vs State and Ors.