IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Criminal Writ Petition No.1563 of 2011 Date of Decision : September 15, 2011 Mohinder Singh and others ….Petitioners Versus State of Punjab and others …. Respondents CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE T.P.S. MANN Present : Mr. Nandan Jindal, Advocate. Mr. P.S. Paul, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab. T.P.S. Mann, J. (Oral) The petitioners have prayed for issuance of appropriate writ, order or direction holding that they have become entitled to be released forthwith like their co-accused Baldev Singh and their further detention was violative of Articles 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India. It is not in dispute that the pre-mature release cases of the petitioners were initiated more than a year back. Uptil now, these cases had been taking rounds of the various levels of the bureaucratic hierarchy. The Court has been informed by learned State counsel that the pre-mature release cases of the petitioners have been sent by the Hon'ble Chief Minister of Punjab to the Criminal Writ Petition No.1563 of 2011 -2- Hon'ble Governor of Punjab on 3.8.2011. In support of his stand, learned State counsel has filed a short affidavit of the Superintendent, Open Air Jail, Nabha, which is taken on record. It is also not in dispute that Baldev Singh, co-accused of the petitioners has already been released, pursuant to his pre- mature release case being accepted by the State government. In view of the above, the present petition is disposed of with a direction that in case the pre-mature release cases of the petitioners are not finally decided within one month from today, they be released on parole on their furnishing personal bonds in the sum of Rs.25,000/- each with two sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the District Magistrate, Sangrur. In case, the pre-mature release cases of the petitioners are declined within the stipulated period, the authorities are not required to release the petitioners on parole. Also, in the event of the pre-mature release cases of the petitioners being declined after their release on parole, the State would be at liberty to take them into custody for undergoing their sentences. ( T.P.S. MANN ) September 15, 2011 JUDGE satish