Crl. Misc. No. M-11645 of 2008 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl. Misc. No. M-11645 of 2008 Date of Decision: November 05, 2008 Sham Singh … Petitioner Versus State of Punjab and others. … Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE S.D. ANAND Present : None for the petitioner. Ms. Manjari Nehru, DAG, Punjab. **** S.D. Anand, J. The parole plea of the petitioner – prisoner was declined by the Competent Authority (vide order dated 13.02.2008 – Annexure P/1) by noticing that “the case of abovesaid convict has been inquired from District Magistrate/SSP and found that he can again involve in selling the poppy husk and also absconded, so recommendation for parole is not made. On the ground of the recommendation of District Magistrate and SSP 1 Crl. Misc. No. M-11645 of 2008 and after considering the adverse report of District Officer and on the ground of abovesaid the case of the release of parole to the convict is not made out.” The impugned order does not at all indicate the foundation of the information that the petitioner – prisoner would again involve himself in the sale of contraband and may also abscond. No criminal history of the petitioner – prisoner is indicated. There is not even an allegation that any criminal case is pending against the petitioner – prisoner or that he had absconded at any earlier point of time. Though the grant of parole is not a right vested in a prisoner, it also cannot be said that a parole plea can be declined on the basis of a vague apprehension indicated by the District Magistrate. The principle of transparency validates the view that the authority competent to consider the request of a prisoner under incarceration must announce to the applicant the reasons for disallowance thereof. The impugned order deserves invalidation as it fails the test of being self- contained and transparent. The petition shall stand disposed of with a direction to the Competent Authority to take a decision afresh in the light of the observations made by this Court in the foregoing paras of this judgment. The exercise 2 Crl. Misc. No. M-11645 of 2008 shall be concluded within fifteen days from today. It will be for the State counsel to communicate the order to the Competent Authority. Disposed of accordingly. Copy of the order be given to the learned State counsel under the signatures of the Court Secretary. November 05, 2008 ( S.D. Anand ) vkd Judge 3