IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Crl. W.P. No. 826 of 2011 DATE OF DECISION : 12.05.2011 Rajinder Kumar alias Banti .... PETITIONER Versus State of U.T., Chandigarh and others ..... RESPONDENTS Crl. W.P. No. 822 of 2011 DATE OF DECISION : 12.05.2011 Parveen Kumar .... PETITIONER Versus State of U.T., Chandigarh and others ..... RESPONDENTS Crl. W.P. No. 833 of 2011 DATE OF DECISION : 12.05.2011 Arun Kumar .... PETITIONER Versus State of U.T., Chandigarh and others ..... RESPONDENTS CORAM :- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SATISH KUMAR MITTAL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M. JEYAPAUL Present: None for the petitioner. Mr. R.S. Rai, Senior Advocate, with Mr. Rajeev Sharma, Advocate, Standing Counsel for U.T. Chandigarh. * * * Crl. W.P. Nos. 826, 822 & 833 of 2011 -2- SATISH KUMAR MITTAL , J. ( Oral ) This order shall dispose of Criminal Writ Petitions No. 826, 822 and 833 of 2011, filed by Rajinder Kumar alias Banti, Parveen Kumar and Arun Kumar, respectively, for setting aside three separate orders dated 29.3.2011 (Annexure P-4), passed by the Inspector General of Prisons, U.T., Chandigarh, rejecting the grant of parole to them, in spite of the orders dated 11.2.2011, passed by this Court in three separate petitions filed by the petitioners, directing the respondents to re-consider the claim of the petitioners for temporary release on parole in the light of the observations made in the said order. On April 06, 2011, while coming to the conclusion that the District Magistrate, Chandigarh as well as the Inspector General of Prisons, U.T., Chandigarh, have exhibited scant regard to the orders passed by the Bench of this Court and have not cared to comply with the directions issued earlier by this Court, issued statutory contempt notice to both the officers to show cause why contempt proceedings be not initiated against them for willful disobedience of the orders passed by this Court. Pursuant to the contempt notice, affidavits of both the aforesaid officers were filed. Today, learned counsel for the respondents has filed an additional affidavit of the District Magistrate, Union Territory, Chandigarh, in Court today, which is taken on record. In this affidavit, it has been stated that the order dated 11.2.2011, passed by this Court directing the Crl. W.P. Nos. 826, 822 & 833 of 2011 -2- respondents to re-consider the claim of the petitioner for temporary release on parole in the light of the observations made in the said order, was never put before him by the Superintendent of his office, and due to that, while re- considering the application of the petitioner, the earlier order could not considered. It has been further stated that the disciplinary action for imposing major penalty has been recommended against the erring officials. The District Magistrate has further tendered unconditional apology for the lapse on the part of his office and ensured that in future, such lapse will not be repeated. After hearing learned counsel for the respondents, keeping in view the explanation furnished by the District Magistrate (respondent No.2 herein), the contempt proceedings initiated vide order dated April 06, 2011, are hereby dropped. Since as per the affidavit of the Inspector General of Prisons, U.T., Chandigarh, all the three petitioners have been released on parole for a period of 28 days, therefore, these petitions have become infructuous. Accordingly, all these petitions are dismissed as having become infructuous. ( SATISH KUMAR MITTAL ) JUDGE May 12, 2011 ( M. JEYAPAUL ) ndj JUDGE