Judgment : LAKSHMAN URAON, J. ( 1 ) HEARD learned Counsel for the parties. Although learned JC to GP II is present, no counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the respondents in the present writ application. ( 2 ) LEARNED Counsel for the petitioner, in this writ application, has prayed for release of the petitioner, namely, Gujar Karmali, who is in custody in connection with Petarbar P. S. Case No. 96 of 1992 (convicted and sentenced by learned 5th Additional Sessions Judge, Bermo vide Sessions Trial No. 140 of 1998 ). ( 3 ) LEARNED Counsel submits that this petitioner confessed his guilt, as he had already served the sentence for more than five years for the offences under Sections 307/149 of the Indian Penal Code. Consequent upon his confession, the learned 5th Additional Sessions Judge, Bermo, by order dated 22nd August, 2003, passed in Sessions Trial No. 140 of 1998, convicted him under Sections 307/149 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced him to undergo simple imprisonment for five years and also to undergo simple imprisonment for six months each for the offence, punishable under Sections 323 and 225b of the Indian Penal Code. However, the sentences were ordered to run con-currently. ( 4 ) LEARNED Counsel for the petitioner submits that this petitioner/convict was remanded to custody on 11. 9. 1992 and was released on bail on 24th July, 1999 and thereafter, he again surrendered on 22nd August, 2003 and is still in custody. ( 5 ) WHEN considered the period undergone by this petitioner it appears that he has served more sentence by remaining in custody against the period of conviction and sentence of five years, It further appears that one representation was made by the wife of this petitioner, namely, Bariya Devi, on 23rd of September, 1983, addressed to the Superintendent of Jail, Tenughat, but no action having been taken on that representation, this writ petition has been filed. ( 6 ) WHEN considered the sub-mission of the learned Counsel for the petitioner, I find that this petitioner has remained in custody for more than six years. ( 6 ) WHEN considered the sub-mission of the learned Counsel for the petitioner, I find that this petitioner has remained in custody for more than six years. Accordingly, in view of the fact that the petitioner has not only served his period of sentence rather he has remained in custody beyond the period of sentence, passed against him, this writ application is allowed and it is ordered that the petitioner Gujar Karmali shall be released forthwith from custody, if not wanted in any other case. This criminal writ petition stands disposed of accordingly. Petition disposed of. --- *** --- .