Crl. Rev. No.592 of 2010 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Crl. Rev. No.592 of 2010 Date of Decision: 25.02.2010 Jaswant ....Petitioner Versus State of Haryana ...Respondent CORAM : Hon'ble Ms. Justice Nirmaljit Kaur Present:- Mr. Kulwant Singh Dhanora, Advocate for the petitioner. ***** 1. Whether Reporters of Local Newspapers may be allowed to see the judgment ? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not ? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest ? ** NIRMALJIT KAUR, J. (ORAL) This is a revision petition against the judgment and order dated 30.05.2009 and 21.07.2009 passed by the Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Hisar and Sessions Judge, Hisar, respectively, vide which, the petitioner has been convicted under Section 9 of Haryana Prisoners Good Conduct (Temporary Release) Act and sentencing him to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of 51 days. While challenging the said judgments, vide which, the petitioner was convicted and the appeal against the same was dismissed, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that while the petitioner was on parole, the wife of the petitioner fell seriously ill, therefore, he was engaged in the treatment of his wife and could not surrender himself before the Crl. Rev. No.592 of 2010 2 Superintendent Canal Jail, Hisar on the expiry of his period of Parole and on improvement of health of his wife, the petitioner immediately surrendered before the trial Court. Secondly, the petitioner has already undergone imprisonment for ten years and is a sufficient punishment for him. The petitioner has been facing the trial of the case for the last more than six years and he had already suffered a lot and in FIR No.117 dated 11.04.2003 under Sections 8/9 of Parole Act, the petitioner has undergone 18 days. Thirdly, in main case of NDPS Act, the petitioner has preferred a SLP (Crl.) No.1845 of 2009, in which, Hon’ble the Apex Court has released the petitioner on bail on the ground that the petitioner was juvenile at the time of occurrence. Learned counsel for the petitioner has been heard. After hearing learned counsel for the petitioner, I find no merit to interfere in the judgment dated 30.05.2009 passed by the Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Hisar, convicting the petitioner and order dated 21.07.2009, vide which, the appeal against the judgment and order of sentence dated 30.05.2009 was dismissed. The Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Hisar, convicted the petitioner by holding as under :- “ In this case, also over stay of the accused for 51 days was due to ill health of the wife of the accused. But accused has not placed on record any evidence in the shape of prescription slip etc. which could show that on the relevant day, wife of the accused was seriously ill. Moreover, there is nothing on record which could show that she was suffering from such illness for which the accused has to overstay for a period of 15 days. It seems that the defence taken by the accused is an after thought defence, hence, he is not entitled to the benefit of the same.” The fact that the petitioner did not surrender on the expiry of a Crl. Rev. No.592 of 2010 3 period of parole, is not denied. Thus, the ground of overstay for 51 days on account of his wife being unwell, cannot be accepted, especially when, no proof for the same has been placed on record. Secondly, the judgment of Hon’ble the Supreme Cannot cannot come to the rescue of the petitioner at this stage. The petitioner is now a major and was admittedly undergoing sentence in the Central Jail, Hisar, where, he was required to surrender back after the expiry of the parole period. At that time, he was not in the special home. No leniency can be shown for jumping parole. It would lead to indiscipline and will send a wrong message to other convicts. Even otherwise, the petitioner was sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for only a period of 51 days for overstaying. This is a period which he overstayed when he was released on parole. Thus, there is no ground to interfere in the well reasoned judgment dated 30.05.2009 passed by the Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Hisar, convicting the petitioner and the order dated 21.07.2009, vide which, the appeal against the judgment and order of sentence dated 30.05.2009 was dismissed. The present revision petition is, accordingly, dismissed. (NIRMALJIT KAUR) 25.02.2010 JUDGE gurpreet