Crl.W.P. No. 1862 of 2010 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl.W.P. No. 1862 of 2010 DATE OF DECISION: JANUARY 17, 2011 Jaswant Singh .....PETITIONER Versus State of Punjab and others ....RESPONDENTS CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SATISH KUMAR MITTAL HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M. JEYAPAUL --- Present: Ms. Bhupinder Pal Kaur Brar, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. K.S. Dadwal, Addl.A.G.,Punjab, for the respondents. .. SATISH KUMAR MITTAL, J. The petitioner, who has been convicted and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten and half years by Judge, Special Court, Patiala in case FIR No.178 dated 21.6.2007 under Sections 15/25 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 registered at P.S. Samana and presently confined in Central Jail, Patiala, has filed this petition for issuing directions to the Superintendent, Central Jail, Patiala (respondent No.2 herein) to release him on parole for six weeks as per surety bonds accepted by respondent No.3 in connection with his release on parole for six weeks duly sanctioned by the Director General of Police (Jails), Punjab. It is the case of the petitioner that earlier he had applied for the Crl.W.P. No. 1862 of 2010 -2- grant of parole for six weeks for agricultural purposes and the same was duly sanctioned to him vide release warrant dated 21.6.2010 issued by the Director General of Police (Jails), Punjab, Chandigarh. Since the petitioner was resident of District Kaithal, his release warrants were sent to the District Magistrate, Kaithal for acceptance of his surety bonds, who, after its acceptance, sent the same to the Superintendent, Central Jail, Patiala for taking necessary action for the release of the petitioner. The Superintendent, Central Jail, Patiala, however, did not release the petitioner and vide his report dated 26.7.2010 sent the case for cancellation of the surety bonds of the petitioner on the ground that a case bearing FIR No.223 dated 8.6.2010 under Sections 29/21 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, P.S. Tripri, Patiala was registered against the petitioner for smuggling smack (coarse heroin) into the prison through his son, who had come to meet him for an interview. Hence, the petitioner has filed the instant petition. In the reply filed on behalf of respondents No.1 and 2, which is taken on record, it has been disclosed that much prior to the passing of the order of release warrant on 21.6.2010, the son of the petitioner had come to Central Jail, Patiala to meet him on 8.6.2010 where he had handed over 10 sachets of what looked like smack (coarse heroin) wrapped in polythene and hidden inside the green peas. When the said narcotic was found in possession of the petitioner, a case bearing No.223 dated 8.6.2010 under Sections 21/29/61/85 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 was registered at PS, Tripri, Patiala against the petitioner and his son Talwinder Singh. Therefore, by smuggling the narcotic into the prison, Crl.W.P. No. 1862 of 2010 -3- the petitioner has committed a jail offence. Hence, for violation of the Punjab Good Conduct (Temporary Release) (First Amendment), Rules, 2003, Superintendent, Central Jail, Patiala wrote a letter dated 26.7.2010 informing the Director General of Police (Prisons), Punjab for cancellation of the release warrant of the petitioner. Learned counsel for the respondent- State submitted that on that information the release warrants of the petitioner were cancelled. Learned counsel for the petitioner could not controvert the aforesaid facts. In view the above facts and circumstances, we do not find any merit in this petition. The parole is a concession given to a convict on fulfilling certain conditions. The convict cannot claim the parole as a matter of right. In this case, the petitioner could not maintain his good conduct in the jail. He has committed the jail offence by attempting to smuggle the narcotic into the jail. In our opinion, the authorities were well within the purview to cancel the surety bonds of the petitioner for his release on parole for committing the jail offence and not maintaining good conduct. In view of the aforesaid, we do not find any ground to issue the directions sought for by the petitioner. Hence, the petition is dismissed. (SATISH KUMAR MITTAL) JUDGE January 17, 2011 ( M. JEYAPAUL ) vkg JUDGE