IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl. W.P. No.2165 of 2010 Date of decision: 08.12.2010 Deepak @ Deepa …. Petitioner Versus State of Haryana and another ….. Respondents Present : Mr. Arun Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. H.S. Sran, Addl. A.G, Haryana. *** S.S. SARON, J. Heard counsel for the parties. The petitioner has been convicted in case FIR No.272 dated 28.7.2009 registered at Police Station Butana District Karnal for the offences under Sections 398 and 402 Indian Penal Code. He has been sentenced to undergo imprisonment for 7 years. The order of conviction and sentence was passed on 14.8.2010. The petitioner is undergoing his sentence in District Jail Karnal. The parents of the petitioner had died and his wife had a pregnancy of 34 weeks. There is no other member in the family to look after the wife of the petitioner. The petitioner applied for parole before the Superintendent, District Jail, Karnal but according to the petitioner, he refused to entertain the parole application on the ground that the petitioner had not completed one year of his sentence after conviction. Notice of motion was issued in the case and the reply has been filed by Sh. Jagjit Singh, Superintendent, District Jail, Karnal on behalf of respondents. It is submitted that the Haryana Crl. W.P. No.2165 of 2010 [2] Good Conduct Prisoners (Temporary Release) Act, 1988 (“Act” – for short) has been enacted to provide for temporary release to the prisoners on good conduct on certain conditions. However, the prisoners cannot claim it as a matter of right as this is only a concession given to them for good conduct and on certain conditions provided in the Act. The petitioner has been convicted and sentenced to undergo 7 years rigorous imprisonment; besides, to pay a fine of `500/- and in default of payment of fine to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one month vide order dated 17.8.2010 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Karnal. The petitioner has undergone five months and five days of sentence including the period as under trial till 2.12.2010. It is submitted that in view of Rule 4(1) of the Haryana Good Conduct Prisoners (Temporary Release) Rules, 2007 (“Rules” – for short) the prisoner is entitled to apply for parole only after he has completed one year of his imprisonment after the conviction and has earned his first annual good remission under the Act. Besides, as per Haryana Government Jails Department Notification dated 30.7.2007 (Annexure R2), the Governor of Haryana has authorized Superintendent of Jail concerned to exercise the power of the State Government only in respect of the grounds specified in Clause (a) of Sub-section (1) of Section 3 of the Act. Therefore, emergency parole can be granted by the Superintendent of Jail only on the ground mentioned in Clause (a) of Sub-section (1) of Section 3 of the Act. Learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that the wife of the petitioner had given birth to a baby boy who died during child birth on 2.12.2010. He has placed on record a certificate to the effect that Mukesh wife of Deepak (petitioner) was admitted in General Hospital, Nilokheri on 2.12.2010 and she had Crl. W.P. No.2165 of 2010 [3] given birth to a baby boy who died on the same day. The certificate is signed by Hans Raj, Sarpanch Gram Panchayat Kalsi Khalsa, Khand Nilokheri (Karnal); besides, is endorsed by Monika Rani, Panch, Isham Singh, Panch, Jagram, Panch, Geeta Devi, Panch and Piara Singh, Panch. In response, learned State counsel has submitted that in view of the Rule 4(1) of the Rules, the petitioner cannot be temporarily released as he has not completed one year of his sentence after conviction. After giving my thoughtful consideration to the matter, it may be noticed that when an application was filed for grant of parole by the petitioner, the son of the petitioner had not died. The said circumstance has arisen during the pendency of the petition. In reply filed by Sh. Jagjit Singh, Superintendent, District Jail, Karnal it has been submitted that emergency parole can be granted by the Superintendent of Jail only on the ground mentioned in Clause (a) of Sub-section (1) of Section 3 of the Act. Section 3(1)(a) of the Act provides for a temporarily release of a member of the prisoner’s family who had died or seriously ill or the prisoner himself is seriously ill. Therefore, the present now is a case of emergency parole which is covered by Section 3(1)(a) of the Act and the rigors of Rule 4(1) of the Rules are not strictly applicable to an emergency parole. In the facts and circumstances, the Superintendent, District Jail, Karnal shall reconsider the matter keeping in view the fact that the Sarpanch and Panches of Gram Panchayat Kalsi Khalsa, Khand Nilokheri (Karnal) have certified that the wife of the petitioner had given birth to a baby boy who died during child birth which would be a case covered under Section 3(1)(a) Act. Accordingly, the present Crl. Writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the Superintendent, District Jail, Karnal to Crl. W.P. No.2165 of 2010 [4] reconsider the case of the petitioner as a fresh ground has occurred during the pendency of the petition and which was not there at the time when the petitioner applied for seeking temporary release on parole. (S.S. SARON) JUDGE December 08, 2010 amit