Cr.W.P.No.1801 of 2011 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Cr.W.P.No.1801 of 2011 Date of Decision: 4.10.2011 Mohit .....Petitioner Vs. State of Haryana and others ....Respondents .... CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S.S. SARON HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAMESHWAR SINGH MALIK **** Present : Mr. A.S. Trikha, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. H.S. Deol, Addl.A.G. Haryana. .... S.S. SARON, J Heard learned counsel for the parties. The petitioner Mohit son of Harbans @ Shayam Sunder @ Shyam Lal has filed this petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India for directing the respondent to allow emergency parole to the petitioner to celebrate/Kanya Dan of his sister Sonam daughter of Shyam Sunder, which is fixed at Hansi for 12.10.2011. The petitioner is undergoing imprisonment for life in case FIR No.321 dated 5.8.2006, which was registered at Police Station City Hansi for the offences under Sections 302/201 IPC. The reason given for seeking parole is that the marriage of the sister of the petitioner is to be solemnised on 12.10.2011. In this regard, the petitioner has submitted an application (Annexure P-1), wherein it is certified by the Municipal Council, Hansi that Cr.W.P.No.1801 of 2011 2 Sonam daughter of Shyam Sunder is a permanent resident of the village and there is no apprehension of breach of peace, if the petitioner is allowed to participate in the marriage of his sister. Notice of motion was issued on 19.9.2011. Reply of Sh.Amit Bhadu, Officiating Superintendent, District Jail, Sirsa has been filed, in which it is stated that in terms of para 9(ii) of the Haryana Good Conduct Prisoners (Temporary Release) Rules, 2007 ('Rules' for short) a convict who has been awarded major jail punishment as defined in para 630 of the Punjab Jail Manual, his parole case shall be initiated after one year from the date of punishment. It is stated that major jail punishment has been awarded to the petitioner on 22.6.2011. Therefore, he is not entitled for parole, as he has not completed one year of imprisonment. An additional affidavit of Sh. J.S. Sethi, Superintendent, District Jail, Sirsa, has been filed in court today, which is taken on record. It is submitted in the said affidavit that the facts about marriage of the sister of convict Mohit (petitioner) were got verified from S.H.O. City Hansi. As per report of the S.H.O., the petitioner is an adopted son of Harbans Lal and he was adopted from Shyam Lal. However, there is no evidence in this regard. Apart from this, it is submitted that every moment of the life of convict Mohit (petitioner) is connected with Harbans Lal and not with Shyam Lal. He has no direct relationship with Shyam Lal. The marriage of Sonam daughter of Shyam Lal is fixed for 12.10.2011. However, Sonam is not the real sister of the petitioner, as he is the adopted son of Harbans Lal. It is also submitted that Mohit belongs to Devender Chawla gang and Devender Chawla has committed serious offences during his parole. Lastly, Cr.W.P.No.1801 of 2011 3 it is submitted that parliamentary bye-election is fixed for 13.10.2011 and granting parole to convict Mohit is not recommended. We have given our thoughtful consideration to the matter. The petitioner was convicted by the learned Additional Sessions Judge,Hisar on 10.12.2008. During his incarceration in the jail, he committed a major jail offence. Accordingly, the Superintendent Jail, Sirsa, awarded punishment of deducting 30 days remission on 22.6.2011. The said order was judicially appraised by the learned Sessions Judge, Sirsa on 28.6.2011. Para 9 (ii) of the Rules envisages that a convict, who has been awarded a major jail punishment as defined in para 630 of the Punjab Jail Manual, his parole case shall be initiated after one year from the date of punishment. Therefore, the petitioner having been awarded a major penality on 22.6.2011, which was judicially appraised by the Sessions Judge, Sirsa on 28.6.2011, he is not entitled for parole till he completes one year after the award of the said punishment. Even otherwise, the affidavit of Sh.J.S. Sethi, Superintendent, District Jail, Sirsa, shows that Sonam, whose marriage is to be solemnised is the daughter of Shyam Lal. The petitioner is adopted son of Harbans Lal. The petitioner in the memo of parties has mentioned his father's name Harbans @ Shayam Sunder @ Shyam Lal. Learned counsel for the State has submitted that Harbans and Shyam Lal are two separate persons and they are not one and the same person. Therefore, it is quite evident from the affidavit of Sh.Sethi that the petitioner is not the real brother of Sonam, whose marriage is to be solemnised. It has also been stated that the petitioner belongs to Devender Chawla gang and Devender Chawla has committed serious offences during his parole. It is also submitted that parliamentary bye-election are fixed for Cr.W.P.No.1801 of 2011 4 13.10.2011. Therefore, the parole to the petitioner is not recommended. As such, the reasons given by the respondents for not recommending the parole case of the petitioner are sound and this court in exercise of its supervisory writ jurisdiction is not to sit in appeal over the reasons given for not recommending the emergency parole case of the petitioner. For the foregoing reasons, there is no merit in the Crl. Writ Petition and the same is accordingly dismissed. ( S.S. SARON ) JUDGE 4.10.2011 (RAMESHWAR SINGH MALIK) GS JUDGE