IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl. Misc. No. M- 13665 of 2008 Date of Decision: October 30, 2008 Sant Singh … Petitioner Versus State of Haryana and others. … Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE S.D. ANAND. Present: Mr. Pawan Hooda, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. S.S. Mor, Sr. DAG, Haryana. S.D. Anand, J. The petitioner applied for his release on parole with a view to be able to effect repair of his house. The Competent Authority declined the plea aforementioned by observing that “the wife and children of the convict are able to look after the house and at that time there is no need of house repair.” The impugned order otherwise noticed that petitioner had double storied pucca house in the village. There can be no dispute with the proposition that petitioner is the best judge of how exactly he would like to go about in effecting repairs of his house which is in occupation of his wife and other members of his family. Crl. Misc. No. M-13665 of 2008 In the counter, there is an averment that the Competent Authority had ascertained from two indicated persons (Ashish Gupta and Sanjay Gulati) that the house does not require any repair at all. In the context of the ascertainment on facts by the Competent Authority, the petitioner has placed on record affidavits filed by Ashish Gupta and Sanjay Gulati aforementioned to the effect that their signatures had been obtained by the police officials on two blank papers. The petitioner has also placed on file a Panchayat certification to buttress the plea for his release on parole. Apart therefrom, there are four photographs of the inside of the house indicating the condition thereof. In the face thereof, the learned State counsel wanted time to have instructions. However, he has not been able to get instructions in the relevant behalf. The petition shall stand disposed of with a direction to the Competent Authority to pass an order afresh, in the light of the facts noticed above, within one month from today. The release shall, of course, be subject to the furnishing of adequate surety etc. by the petitioner – prisoner. It will be for the State counsel to communicate the order to the Competent Authority. October 30, 2008 ( S.D. Anand ) vkd Judge 2