Criminal Misc. No. M-24788 of 2009 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Criminal Misc. No. M-24788 of 2009 Date of Decision: 03.03.2010 Rajesh Kumar son of Ranjeet Singh, r/o village Aasan, Tehsil Bhadra, P.S. Bhirani, Distt. Hanumangarh (Rajasthan). ... Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Punjab, through the Director General of Prisons, Punjab, Sector 17, Chandigarh. 2. The Superintendent, Central Jail, Ferozepur. 3. The District Magistrate, P.S. Bhirani, Hanumangarh (Rajasthan). 4. The District Magistrate, P.S. Sadar, Abhor, Punjab. ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHAM SUNDER Present: Mr. A.S. Trikha, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. T.S. Salana, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab, for the respondent – State. SHAM SUNDER, J. This petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C., for quashing the order (Annexure P1), rejecting the prayer for parole of the petitioner, under Section 6 of the Punjab Good Conduct Prisoners (Temporary Release) Act, 1982, has been filed, by the petitioner. Criminal Misc. No. M-24788 of 2009 2 2. The petitioner, was arrested, in case FIR No. 29 dated 03.03.05, under Section 18 of the Narcotic Drugs and Physchotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter to be called as the 'Act' only), P.S. Abohar. He was tried and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment, for a period of 10 years, by the Court of Sessions Judge. He is undergoing sentence in Central Jail, Ferozepur. He applied for parole for 4 weeks for his house repair. His case for parole was recommended, but the competent authority declined his prayer on the ground that his release on parole will cause the breach of peace and endanger the security of State. It was stated that the order impugned, was passed without any legal and valid basis, and, is, thus, illegal. 3. I have heard the Counsel for the parties, and, have gone through the documents, on record, carefully. 4. The Counsel for the petitioner, submitted that there was no material, on record, that the release of the petitioner on parole would endanger the security of State. He further submitted that the order, being illegal is liable to be set aside. 5. On the other hand, the Counsel for the respondent, submitted that the order, declining the parole, was passed, in accordance with law. 6. After giving my thoughtful consideration, to the rival contentions, raised by the Counsel for the parties, in my considered opinion, the petition, is liable to be accepted, for the reasons, to be Criminal Misc. No. M-24788 of 2009 3 recorded, hereinafter. There was no concrete data or material, before the authority concerned that, in case, the petitioner, was released on parole, he will misuse the concession thereof or that his such release would endanger the public peace and security of State. Nothing was mentioned, in the order of the District Magistrate, as to, on the basis of which material, he came to such a conclusion. The competent authority, without application of mind, to the facts and circumstances of the case, illegally declined the request, made by the convict, for his release on parole. The order impugned, is liable to be set aside, and the case deserves to be remanded back for fresh decision of the application for parole, already moved by the petitioner. 7. For the reasons recorded above, Criminal Misc. No. M- 24788 of 2009, is accepted. The order dated 08.06.09, declining parole, to the petitioner, is set aside. The case is remanded back, to the Director General of Police (Prisons), Punjab, Chandigarh, to reconsider the application of the petitioner for parole, in accordance with the relevant provisions of law and Rules, and then decide the same, within a period of 30 days, from the date of receipt of a copy of the order. 03.03.2010 (SHAM SUNDER) Amodh JUDGE