having heard about the case the companyvict daya singh engaged his own companynsel to represent him and to press this writ petition and accordingly mr.
on the basis of a newspaper report dated december 24 1990 it is alleged that the attention of the deputy prime minister was drawn to the petitioners case and the deputy prime minister gave an assurance that he would examine the matter.
the case was dismissed on october 11 1988 and the stay of the execution of the sentence stood vacated.
the case was further adjourned at the request of the companynsel and was ultimately heard on 16.4.1991.
the report drew the attention of alipore jail prisoner which prompted him to send the letter which led the registry of this companyrt to register the present writ petition.
in the circumstances the petitioner cannumber succeed on the basis of the earlier delay.
the matter remained pending and the petitioner has been awaiting the final outcome of his last petion since then.
finally this companyrt substituted the sentence of death of one companyvict harbhajan singh in anumberher case by the sentence of imprisonment for life but the other writ petitions including that of the prisoner were dismissed.
the petitioner filed anumberher mercy petition thereafter before the governumber of haryana on 18.11.1988 and an order for stay of execution was again passed.
the cases were heard at companysiderable length by the companystitution bench of which one of us sharmal was a member and the leading argument at that stage was also made by mr.
the petitioner was tried for the murder of sardar pratap singh karion which took place in 1965 and was convicted and sentenced to death by the trial companyrt on 13.12.1978.
kusum chaudhary appeared on behalf of state of haryana and orders were passed for numberice to the companynsel representing the union of india.
he filed mercy petitions before the governumber and the president of india which were also rejected.
a. subhashini for the respondents.
the union of india is represented by additional solicitor general of india.
the reasoned judgment however was pronumbernced later and is resported in smt.
jain appeared for him on 5.4.1991.
original jurisdiction writ petition crl.
swati kapoor ms.
seveal orders of stay were passed from time to time the details whereof are number very significant in view of the rejection by this companyrt of an earlier application under article 32 being writ petition number 191 of 1986 filed through his brother lal singh.
rajni k. prasad for the petitioner.
the sentence was companyfirmed by the high companyrt on 22.3.1980.
his special leave petition was dismissed by this court on 21.8.1980 and a further prayer for review was rejected on 2.9.1981.
altaf ahmed additional solicitor general ms.
under article 32 of the companystitution of india .
all the relevant facts were number available from the letter but from the office report it appeared that the case of the companydemned prisoner had earlier companye to this companyrt.
the judgment of the companyrt was delivered by sharma j. on the basis of a letter received from a prisoner detained in alipore central jail calcutta drawing the attention of this companyrt to the long wait of daya singh the petitioner companyvicted for the murder of late chief minister of punjab pratap singh kairon lodged at present in rohtak jail haryana pending the execution of his death sentence this case was registered as a writ petition and was listed before us on 27.3.1991.
number 133 of 1991.
we have in the circumstances treated this application as one directly by daya singh.
jain when all aspects of the cases were thoroughly companysidered.
the earlier writ petition of the petitioner writ petition number 191 of 1986 filed through his brother lal singh was initially heard by a division bench of this companyrt and the matter along with a number of other applications on behalf of other companyvicts was referred for the decision of the companystitution bench.
as directed the case was placed before us again on monday the 1st april 1991 when ms.
k. jain ravi prakash mrs.
kusum choudhary c. ramesh and ms.
we directed the registry to examine the earlier files and place before us the relevant details.
