Criminal Misc. No.M-23559 of 2008 -1- **** IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Criminal Misc. No.M-23559 of 2008 Date of decision : 29.9.2008 Dildar Singh .....Petitioner Versus State of UT and others ...Respondents **** CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. D. ANAND Present: Mr. J.S.Bains, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Nirbhay Singh, Advocate for Mr. D.D.Sharma, Advocate for the U.T., Chandigarh. S. D. ANAND, J. The petitioner-prisoner has applied for the release on parole with a view to be able to meet his 82 years old father who is on death bed on account of cancer. Medical certifications ( Ex. P1, P2 and P3) issued by the relevant hospitals, have been placed on record. In spite thereof, the competent authority has not taken a decision in the matter on grant or decline of parole plea of the petitioner-prisoner. The further averment made by the petitioner is that his brother Dilawar Singh is of unsound mind, that Manjeet Kaur (wife of the petitioner) is a heart partient had undergone Angiography two years ago and also that his elder sister Mohinder Kaur aged 75 years is also a heart patient. The essential purpose of the petitioner is to prove that he only would be able to look after his father. On 15.9.2008, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Criminal Misc. No.M-23559 of 2008 -2- **** U.T., Chandigarh, applied for an adjournment in order to be able to verify the correctness or otherwise of the medical certifications relied upon by the petitioner. He also sought time to verify the averments made by the petitioner in the context of the health status of other members of his family. The matter was adjourned to 22.9.2008. On that date, learned counsel for the U.T., Chandigarh again applied for a short adjournment to obtain the verification aforementioned. The matter was adjourned to 29.9.2008. When the matter was taken up earlier in the day, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the U.T., Chandigarh applied for grant of yet another adjournment. The plea was resisted by the learned counsel for the petitioner. It is pointed out that if the matter is delayed, the petitioner may not at all be able to meet his father during latter's life time. The matter was adjourned to till after lunch in order to enable the U.T. Counsel to obtain instructions from the District Magistrate, Chandigarh. Learned counsel had, earlier in the day, informed that the matter had been brought to the notice of District Magistrate, Chandigarh and he had addressed the relevant quarters in that behalf. In the afternoon, the matter has been taken up. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the counsel for U.T. again draws a blank and requests for an adjournment for instructions. In the peculiar facts and circumstances, the petition shall stand allowed. The petitioner is ordered to be released on parole for a period of ten days in order to enable him to meet his ailing father. The release of the petitioner on parole shall, ofcourse, be subject to furnishing of adequate surety etc. to the satisfaction of the Officer competent in that behalf. It will be for the State counsel to communicate the order to the Criminal Misc. No.M-23559 of 2008 -3- **** competent authority. Copy of the order be given to the learned State counsel under the signatures of the Court Secretary. September 29, 2008 (S. D. ANAND) Pka JUDGE Note: Whether to be referred to Reporter: Yes/No