IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Criminal Misc. No.M-30600 of 2009 Date of Decision: 14.12.2009 Mam Chand Petitioner Versus State of Haryana and others Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASBIR SINGH HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE DAYA CHAUDHARY Present: Mr.Surender Deswal, Advocate for the petitioner Mr.Sartaj Singh Gill, DAG Punjab …. Jasbir Singh, J. (Oral) This application has been moved with a prayer to set aside order dated 20.10.2009 (P1), vide which, prayer of the petitioner for grant of parole, to repair his house, was declined. Petitioner is a convict and undergoing imprisonment for commission of an offence under Section 302 IPC. After conviction, he is inside the jail for about two years. Other members of the family are also in the jail. By taking recourse to the provisions of Haryana Good Conduct Prisoners (Temporary Release) Act, 1988 (in short, the Act), he moved an application for grant of parole, to repair his house. On his application, report was sought from the District Magistrate, who, vide letter dated Criminal Misc. No.M-30600 of 2009 15.10.2009 has intimated that as per report of the Superintendent of Police Mewat, the applicant had been Sarpanch of his village for 15-20 years, he is heading one faction of the population in the village and if released on parole, there is possibility of dispute in the village, as earlier also, there was some dispute regarding Panchayat Elections. Report was communicated to the Commissioner, Gurgaon Division, Gurgaon. On those very reasons, prayer for grant of parole was declined. Hence, this application. After hearing counsel for the parties, we feel that the order passed is not justified. As per provision of Section 3(1)(d) of the Act, for any sufficient cause, parole can be granted. This Court has held in number of cases that house repair is a sufficient cause, for which, parole can be granted to a convict. Merely because, the petitioner had been Sarpanch of the village for 15-20 years, it cannot be presumed that if released on parole, there may be dispute between the varying factions in the village. The objection raised is only imaginary. The petitioner does not have any criminal past. In view of above circumstances, we allow this application, set aside order dated 20.10.2009 (P1), declining parole to the petitioner and order that concession of parole be granted to the petitioner for a period of four weeks from the date of his release. On expiry of that period, he shall submit to the jurisdiction of the jail authorities forthwith. (Jasbir Singh) Judge 14.12.2009 (Daya Chaudhary) gk Judge 2