[ad_1]
The Supreme Court on Monday sought response from the Bihar government on its decision to release former Bihar Member of Parliament (MP) Anand Mohan, who was serving life imprisonment for the murder of Gopalganj district magistrate G Krishnaiah in December 1994.
Issuing notice on a petition filed by the former IAS officer’s wife Umadevi Krishnaiah, a bench of justices Surya Kant and JK Maheshwari also issued notice to the Centre and Anand Mohan and posted the matter next week.
To ensure Mohan gets the notice, the Supreme Court directed the service of notice through the Saharsa district superintendent of police. The ex-MP is currently residing at Saharsa.
Also Read: Slain Gopalganj DM’s wife moves SC over ex-MP Anand Mohan’s release
Senior advocate Sidharth Luthra assisted by advocate Ritu Raj argued the petition for the aggrieved widow claiming that the decision of the Bihar government to amend the Bihar Prison Manual was done with the sole aim to release Mohan.
Mohan was sentenced to death by a trial court in 2007. His sentence was commuted to life by the Patna high court in 2008, a decision which the Supreme Court upheld in July 2012.
“The said amendment has been brought about only for the benefit of the convict as he is apparently the only convict to get the benefit of this amendment,” read the petition.
On April 10, the Nitish Kumar government amended the Bihar Prison Manual, 2012, removing the “murder of a public servant on duty” clause from the list of cases for which remission of jail term cannot be considered which allowed a convict punished for the murder of a public servant to be eligible for premature release after undergoing 14 years of incarceration.
The earlier rule on remission prevailing in the state was governed by the 2002 policy under which such convicts were to be considered for premature release only on completion of 20 years of imprisonment. The gangster-turned-politician was officially released from Saharsa jail on April 27.
The petition termed the April 10 notification “ex-facie illegal” and contrary to judgments of the Supreme Court.
Terming Mohan’s release “very unfortunate” Luthra said that at the time of the (murder) incident, Mohan was a member of the Bihar assembly. The petition further stated that Mohan enjoyed political support and belonged to an influential family, adding that he had 32 criminal cases pending against him and it could not be said with certainty that he “lost his potentiality to commit crime”.
Also Read: Anand Mohan release: New caste equations being tried in Bihar ahead of 2024 polls, say experts
While inside the jail, the petition highlighted instances where Mohan was found to possess mobile phones with SIM cards. On another occasion, he was allowed to attend the trial by travelling in his own vehicle and staying at a government circuit house. These were important considerations that should have gone against Mohan’s release, the petition said.
Further, the petition filed by advocate Tanya Shree said, “The notification of April 10 and order dated April 24 (releasing Mohan) is arbitrary, unreasonable, and has been passed without taking into consideration the guidelines for premature release of convicts issued in Laxman Naskar case and has resulted in denial of justice to family of deceased and is in violation of Article 14 (right to equality) and Article 21 (life and liberty) of Constitution.”
The top court also heard an application moved by an ex-IAS officer and former Union minister KJ Alphons who sought to intervene in the proceedings. Present in person, Alphons said, “I seek to be impleaded in the matter as I am deeply distressed by the state’s decision.” The Court allowed Alphons to render assistance when the matter is next heard.
[ad_2]
Source link
