IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl. Writ Petition No. 2073 of 2010(O&M) Date of Decision: January 3, 2011. Narender Singh ...... PETITIONER(s) Versus State of Haryana and others. ...... RESPONDENT (s) CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAM CHAND GUPTA Present: Mr. H.S.Jaswal, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Amandeep Singh, A.A.G., Haryana. ***** RAM CHAND GUPTA, J.(Oral) The present petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for quashing of impugned order dated 07.10.2010, Annexure P2 passed by respondent No.1 vide which request of petitioner for grant of parole for agricultural operations under Section 3(1)(c) of the Haryana Good Conduct Prisoners (Temporary Release) Act, 1988 (for short the ‘Act’) has been rejected. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the whole record. Briefly stated, petitioner is undergoing imprisonment for life in FIR No.145 dated 07.10.2003, under Sections 302/201/34 IPC, Police Station CRWP No.2073 of 2010 Bilaspur, District Yamuna Nagar as appeal filed by him against judgment of conviction passed by court of Sessions was dismissed by this Court. On 25.07.2010, petitioner made a request to respondent No.2 i.e. Superintendent, Central Jail, Ambala for grant of parole for agricultural operations. Request of petitioner was duly recommended by respondent No.2 as he was entitled as per the Act and the rules for parole for agricultural operations. Petitioner has also annexed copy of Jamabandi for the year 2002-2003 as Annexure P-1. Even District Magistrate, Yamuna Nagar recommended the case of petitioner for his release on parole after getting the matter verified. After receipt of report from respondent No.3 i.e. District Magistrate, Yamuna Nagar respondent No.1, who is competent authority to grant parole under the Act and the rules rejected the same on the ground that he had recently availed four weeks parole w.e.f. 26.05.2010 to 26.06.2010. A convict is entitled for parole for agricultural operations under Section 3 of the Act, which reads as under:- “3. Temporary release of prisoners on certain grounds. (1) The State Government may, in consultation with the District Magistrate or any other officer appointed in this behalf, by notification in the official gazette and subject to such conditions and in such manner as may be prescribed, release temporarily for a period specified in sub-section (2), any prisoner, if the State Government is satisfied that. (a) a member of the prisoner’s family had died or is seriously ill or the prisoner himself is seriously ill; or (b) the marriage of prisoner himself, his son, daughter, grandson, grand-daughter, brother, sister, sister’s son or daughter is to be celebrated; or (c) the temporary release of the prisoner is necessary for ploughing, sowing or harvesting or carrying on any other 2 CRWP No.2073 of 2010 agricultural operation on his land or his father’s undivided land actually in possession of the petitioner. (d) it is desirable to do so for any other sufficient cause. (2) The period for which a prisoner may be released shall be determined by the State Government so as not to exceed- (a) where the prisoner is to be released on the grounds specified in clause (a) of sub-section (1), three weeks; (b) where the prisoner is to be released on the ground specified in clause (b) or clause (d) of sub-section (1), four weeks; and (c) where the prisoner is to be released on the grounds specified in clause (c) of sub-section (1), six weeks; Provided that the temporary release under clause (c) can be availed more than once during the year, which shall not, however, cumulatively exceed six weeks. (3) The period of release under this section shall not count towards the total period of the sentence of a prisoner. (4) The State Government may, by notification, authorize any officer to exercise its powers under this section in respect of all or any other ground specified thereunder.” Further Section 6 of the Act provides for the grounds on which the parole can be refused, which reads as under:- “6. Prisoners not entitled to be released in certain cases. – Notwithstanding anything contained in Sections 3 and 4, no prisoner shall be entitled to be released under this Act if, on the report of the District Magistrate, the State Government or an officer authorized by it in this behalf is satisfied that his release is likely to endanger the security of the State or the maintenance of public order.” Bare perusal of Section 6 of the Act shows that release of petitioner on parole can be refused only on the ground that the same is likely 3 CRWP No.2073 of 2010 to endanger the security of the State or the maintenance of the public order. However, the request of the petitioner for his release on agricultural operations has not been declined on any of the grounds mentioned under Section 6 of the Act. Rather his request for his release on agricultural parole has been declined on the ground that he has recently availed parole from 26.05.2010 to 26.06.2010 for house repair. However, there is no bar under the Act and the rules for availing parole for agricultural operations, which is covered under Section 3(1)(c) of the Act and for any other purpose under Section 3(1)(d) of the Act in the same year. As he was entitled under the Act and the rules, his case for agricultural parole was duly forwarded by Superintendent, Central Jail, Ambala and was also recommended by respondent No.2 – Superintendent, District Magistrate, Yamuna Nagar. Hence, it cannot be said that impugned order is justified on any of the grounds mentioned in Section 6 of the Act. Hence, the same cannot be sustained in the eyes of law. In view of these facts, the present petition is allowed and the impugned order dated 07.10.2010, Annexure P2 passed by the competent authority refusing release of the petitioner on agricultural parole is set-aside. Respondent No.1 is directed to reconsider the case of the present petitioner for his release on agricultural parole in the light of the observations of this Court made above and under the Act and the rules, within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. Disposed of accordingly. ( RAM CHAND GUPTA ) January 3, 2011. JUDGE 'om' 4 CRWP No.2073 of 2010 Note: Whether to be referred to reporter? Yes / No 5