Prisoner in Rajiv murder case moves HC for premature release

Chennai, Jul 20 (UNI) Robert Payaz, a convicted prisoner in the former Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi assasination case, today moved the Madras High Court, seeking a direction to the authorities, to consider his premature release.

Mr Justice K Raviraja Pandian before whom the petition filed by Robert Payaz, came up for hearing, ordered notice, returnable by two weeks, to Tamil Nadu Home Secretary, Additional Director General of Prison and Superintendent of Central Prison, Vellore.

In his petition, Robert Payaz submitted that as a life convict, he had so far undergone more than 14 years. He was entitled to be considered for premature release under Article 161 of the Constitution.

The Superintendent (SP) in fact initiated a proposal for his premature release and called for the reports of the Probation Officer and the District Collector as required under Rule 340 of the Tamil Nadu Prison Manual Volume-II.

He learnt that the Probation Officer has informed the SP that since he was a Sri Lankan national, a report from his native place was necessary for considering his case for premature release.

Pursuant to such advise of the Probation Officer, the SP has thought it fit not to proceed further, he added.

He submitted that he made a representation dated December 28, 2004 to the SP for his premature release. On the basis of the same, the said proposal was initiated by SP, but he was not considered only on the ground that the report from a Probation Officer in his locality in Sri Lanka would be essential for the purpose of his premature release.

The authorities would consider the following important aspects before prematurally releasing a life convict, Whether there was any chance of future recurrence of committing crime, whether the convict has lost his potentiality in committing crime and whether there was any fruitful purpose of confining the convict any more.

The requirement of a report from a Probation Officer in Sri Lanka for considering his premature release, would be unfair and unreasonable, he alleged. This requirement was impossible of compliance, he felt. Consideration of his premature release cannot be denied only on this ground, he added.

UNI XR KVV RL ND1854