Haryana Good Conduct Prisoners (Temporary Release) Act, 2022 (15 of 2022), Section 3 – Death of wife -- Emergency parole to hardcore prisoner -- A hardcore prisoner can be released on temporary basis or on furlough after completion of 5 years of imprisonment but he cannot be released on emergency parole in case he has not completed requisite 5 years period of his imprisonment after the date of his latest offence -- Fresh FIR under NDPS Act was registered against the petitioner on 04.06.2025 -- He cannot be released on emergency parole -- To enable him to perform the last rites/ rituals of his deceased wife, he is allowed to be taken to his place of residence at his own expenses, while under police escort guard.

(Para 5, 6)

Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), Sections 302, 397, 34 – Constitution of India, Article 21 -- Parole – To accompany his ailing wife who is suffering from various diseases and maintain social ties with his daughter who is settled in Australia – Held, parole serves a reformative and humanitarian purpose by preserving family ties and supporting rehabilitation -- Despite directions dated 16.09.2025 requiring a decision on his parole within two weeks, the authorities failed to comply -- Such administrative delay cannot be allowed to prejudice the petitioner’s rights -- While parole, no doubt, is a concession, but it is, in essence, a reformative measure grounded in Article 21 of the Constitution, ensuring the right to life with dignity even during incarceration -- Petitioner ordered to be released on parole for four weeks.

(Para 3.1, 9)

A. Punjab Good Conduct Prisoners’ (Temporary Release) Act, 1962 (11 of 1962), Section 1 -- Haryana Good Conduct Prisoners (Temporary Release) Act, 2022 (15 of 2022), Section 1 – Parole/ Temporary release – Object of – The very object of the Act is humanitarian in nature -- Providing opportunities for temporary release ensures that the ties between the prisoner and the society are not severed -- Ensuring that the incarcerated have healthy roots in the society greatly assists in their rehabilitation and reintegration -- It also incentivizes the inmates to maintain good conduct while in custody, that aids the jail authorities in administration as well.

(Para 7)

B. Punjab Good Conduct Prisoners’ (Temporary Release) Act, 1962 (11 of 1962), Section 3(1)(d) -- Haryana Good Conduct Prisoners (Temporary Release) Act, 2022 (15 of 2022), Section 3 – Constitution of India, Article 215 -- Parole/ Temporary release – Delay in disposal – Contempt against competent authority -- The incarcerated cannot be expected to live at the whims and fancies of the State and neither does their incarceration entitle the administration to jeopardize their fundamental rights under Article 21 of the Constitution of India -- Since the statute itself bestows the convict with the right to be considered for temporary release and enlists circumstances therefor, it is all the more vital to decide such applications expeditiously. Directions issued :

All applications pertaining to temporary release on parole shall be decided by the concerned authority within a period of 04 months from receipt of such application -- In case, these directions are not adhered to without any justifiable cause, the convicts would be at liberty to move an appropriate application under Article 215 of the Constitution of India seeking initiation of contempt of Court proceedings against the officials concerned – Copy of judgment ordered to be supplied to States of Punjab and Haryana as well as U.T. Chandigarh for compliance thereof.

(Para 8-13)

Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), Section 323, 376D, 363, 366A, 120B -- Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (32 of 2012), Section 5, 6 -- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 439 – POCSO -- Short term bail – Liver transplantation of father – Applicant proposed to donate his liver -- Applicant ordered to be released on short term bail for a period of six weeks on humanitarian ground.

(Para 3, 5, 6)

Haryana Good Conduct Prisoners (Temporary Release) Act, 2022 (15 of 2022), Section 3, 4 -- Punjab Good Conduct Prisoners’ (Temporary Release) Act, 1962 (11 of 1962), Section 3, 4 -- Prisons Act, 1894 (9 of 1894), Section 45 -- Punjab Jail Manual, Para 607 – Constitution of India, Article 21 -- Unauthorised possession of mobile phone in jail – Denial of Parole – Ground of:

– It is oppressive, till an accused is declared guilty, through a verdict becoming passed by the court of competent jurisdiction, thus thereupto rather he is presumed to be innocent

– It would create an unreasonable classification against inmated prisoners, who merely unauthorizedly possess mobile phones.

– Principle of fair trial, quartered within the domain of Article 21 of the Constitution of India -- Said constitutional norm cannot be breached even in respect of a prisoner.

-- Home Secretaries of the State of Haryana and Punjab to forthwith install STD facilities in the jails concerned, so that therebys the inmates prisoners can communicate with their friends and relatives, but, on payment of relevant charges.

Parole is not to be denied in a mechanical manner, without application of mind -- District Magistrates/ competent authority directed to apply their mind objectively to the relevant material furnished by the police, local Panchayats and only in cases where they receive cogent, tangible and concrete evidence indicating that the inmated prisoner, if released on parole, would be an imminent threat to the security and peace of the area concerned, thus thereupon they may well consider to, on good reasons, reject his/ her application for parole -- In the event of the competent authorities not objectively applying their mind they would be liable for censure/ disciplinary action for theirs prompting frivolous and avoidable litigation.

(Para 25-30, 43, 45)

A. Prisons Act, 1894 (9 of 1894), Section 59(5)(28) – Prisons (Bombay Furlough and Parole) Rules, 1959, Rule 19 -- Parole -- Son going abroad – A happy occasion like this, son secured an admission in a prestigious University in Australia, who is going to depart from the country for a period of two years -- If for the purpose of celebration of marriage parole can be granted, Court failed to understand why merely because the rule do not contemplate such a contingency, the benefit of this rule shall not be extended to the petitioner – 10 days parole granted.

(Para 8-10)

B. Prisons Act, 1894 (9 of 1894), Section 59(5)(28) – Prisons (Bombay Furlough and Parole) Rules, 1959, Rule 19 -- Parole – Furlough -- Provisions of Parole and Furlough have been time and again looked towards as a humanistic approach towards the convicts lodged in Jail for an act purely attributed to them. -- In order to afford an opportunity to them to be in touch with the outside world and to arrange for their family affairs as though behind bars, the convict continue to be someone’s son, husband, father, brother and upon being released, though for temporary period on Furlough or in an emergency situation on parole, like death of a member of family or to attend to a member on account of his illness, the Furlough and Parole have received approval as conditional release of a prisoner.

(Para 7, 8)

Constitution of India, Article 226 -- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 482 – Parole for own engagement and marriage ceremony -- Petition allowed, petitioner granted parole for a period of two weeks.

(Para 1-5)

Rajasthan Prisoners (Release on Parole) Rules, 1958, Rule 9, 14(c) – Constitution of India, Article 226 -- Permanent parole – Overstay in earlier parole – Effect of – Conviction for life in offence u/s 148, 342, 458, 396, 397, 398 of IPC -- Jail conduct of the petitioner is satisfactory -- Petitioner has served the actual sentence for a period of more than 15 years, therefore, the petitioner is entitled for permanent parole as per Rule 9 -- Overstaying of the petitioner after being released on parole would not fall under Rule 14(c) -- Writ petition (parole) allowed -- Respondents directed to release the petitioner on permanent parole

(Para 2, 10, 11)

Constitution of India, Article 226 -- Extension of period of Parole – Petitioner released on parole -- Suffered a fracture on his right ankle joint – Held, jurisdiction at this stage not exercisable by High Court, but is exercisable only by the Competent Authority -- Review jurisdiction exercisable only in case a declining order is made by the Competent Authority -- Prayer is mis-constituted, and, is liable to be rejected – However, one week protection from step into prison given and one week time granted to move application before competent authority for extension of parole, then on such application valid speaking order shall be expeditiously recorded.

(Para 3, 4)

Punjab Good Conduct Prisoners’ (Temporary Release) Act, 1962 (11 of 1962), Section 3(1)(aa) – Parole – To meet and take care of family – Petitioner has never been released on parole earlier – Concession of parole to a convict is regulated by the statute and the authorities thereunder cannot act arbitrarily and capriciously -- Rejection of the application seeking parole by a convict should be through a well-reasoned and speaking order -- Two co-convicts have already been granted the concession of parole though one of them was found using mobile phone in the jail -- Petitioner ordered to be released on parole for a period of six weeks.

(Para 12-14)

Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (26 of 1881), Section 138 -- Parole leave for financial assistance to the family and engagement of daughter – Applicant sentenced to undergo one year imprisonment u/s 138 of NI Act and has already undergone sentence of about 06 months – Applicant-convict ordered to be released on parole leave for a period of 15 days.

(Para 1, 2)

Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (26 of 1881), Section 138 -- Parole leave for filing appeal -- Conviction in 13 case u/s 138 of NI Act for 1 year each -- Applicant has undergone approximately 09 months incarceration -- Applicant directed to be released on parole leave in all the offences for a period of 30 Days – Prior to release, the applicant shall deposit an amount of Rs.10,000/- with the jail authorities -- In case the applicant surrenders in time, the said amount shall be refunded to the applicant.

(Para 3-5)

Constitution of India, Article 226 – Parole -- Admission of son in school and to take care of agriculture crop – Superintendent of District Jail directed to ensure, deploying of armed police escort along with the petitioner to enable him to make arrangements regarding the admission of his son in the school and to take care of his agricultural crops and fields – Petitioner ordered to be release from morning of 20.04.2023 uptill the evening of 03.05.2023 – All the expenses to be borne by the petitioner.

(Para 1, 2)

Haryana Good Conduct Prisoners (Temporary Release) Act, 2022 (15 of 2022), Section 5(1), 11 – Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), Sections 302, 34 -- Murder convict -- Emergency parole – Wife met with an accident – Petitioner ordered to release on emergency parole for a period of fifteen days.

(Para 6-10)

Punjab Good Conduct Prisoners’ (Temporary Release) Act, 1962 (11 of 1962), Section 3(1)(a) -- Emergency parole – Death of mother-in-law – Antim Ardas (Bhog) fixed for 19.02.2023 -- Petition allowed and the petitioner ordered to be released on interim parole from 16.02.2023 to 22.02.2023.

(Para 1-3)

Punjab Good Conduct Prisoners’ (Temporary Release) Act, 1962 (11 of 1962), Section 2(aa), 3(1)(a) – Constitution of India, Article 226 -- NDPS case -- Parole to attend marriage of daughter – Petitioner is a convict, granted the concession of parole but misused the same and another case under the NDPS Act registered against him -- Conduct of the petitioner does not entitle him to the relief -- His presence in the marriage ceremonies (18/19.02.2023) would be essential being the father -- Petitioner permitted to take part in the marriage ceremonies in custody from 09.00 AM to 07.00 PM on 17.02.2023, 18.02.2023, 19.02.2023 and 20.02.2023 at his expenses.

(Para 8-11)

Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), Section 53 -- Prisons Act, 1894 (9 of 1894), Section 55 -- Goa Prisons Rules, 2006, Rule 2(11), 335 -- Life imprisonment – Pre-mature release – Parole period -- Whether the period of parole is to be excluded from the period of sentence while considering 14 years of actual imprisonment – Held, for the purpose of considering actual imprisonment, the period of parole is to be excluded.

(Para 8-10)

Constitution of India, Article 226 -- Conviction for five years – Parole for marriage of nephew – Petitioner is not entitled to parole as he has not spent one year in prison post-conviction – In the larger interest of justice, Court deemed it fit and appropriate to issue directions upon the Superintendent of the jail, and, also upon the Station House Officer of the jurisdictional police station, to ensure that two armed police guards, in plain clothes, are deployed alongwith the convict-petitioner, to the venue of the marriage concerned – Stepping outside of prison commence  in the evening of 05.01.2023, and, shall last uptill the morning of 12.01.2023 allowed -- All the expenses towards the transportation of the convict-petitioner besides qua the accompanying him armed guards shall be borne by the convict-petitioner -- Since the venue of the marriage is located in Punjab, jurisdictional Station House Officer(s) of the police station, of the venue concerned, also directed to ensure that no untoward incident takes places at the venue of the marriage.

(Para 4-9)

Haryana Good Conduct Prisoners (Temporary Release) Act, 2022 (15 of 2022), Section 12(11) – Constitution of India, Article 226 -- Parole – Non-decisioning of application – Writ petition – State that decision with respect to the grant of parole is to be taken within a period of 7 weeks -- 7 weeks have already elapsed, petition disposed of with a direction to the official respondents to take a final decision on the application within a period of 10 days.

(Para 2-6)

Punjab Good Conduct Prisoners’ (Temporary Release) Act, 1962 (11 of 1962), Section 3(1)(d) -- Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), Section 302, 427,120-B, 34 – Murder – Life imprisonment – Ailment of mother -- Parole – Petitioner availed parole/ furlough on different occasions, without any default -- Petitioner is having old mother aged about 86 years and there is no major male member to look after her and she is suffering from heart ailment which requires surgery – Nothing on record to show that the release of petitioner on parole is likely to endanger the security of the State and maintenance of public order -- Petitioner ordered to be released on parole for a period of four weeks.

(Para 4-8)

Punjab Good Conduct Prisoners’ (Temporary Release) Act, 1962 (11 of 1962), Section 3, 4 -- Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (61 of 1985), Sections 22/61/85 – NDPS case -- Parole to meet family members, and, to take care of them – Dis-affirmative order on application – In impugned order there is no recital that within the ambit of the relevant policy, the petitioner did not become entitled for parole – Order not founded upon any valid criterion and valid reasons -- District Magistrate directed to forthwith release the petitioner.

(Para 5-7)

Haryana Good Conduct Prisoners (Temporary Release) Act, 1988 (28 of 1988), Section 3, 4 -- Constitution of India, Article 226 -- Parole – Application to competent authority – Requirement of – Writ jurisdiction -- Petitioner should not have approached this Court directly without exhausting the remedy before the competent authority -- Writ dismissed -- However, the petitioner shall always be at liberty to approach the competent authority for the grant of parole in accordance with law.

(Para 5, 6)

Punjab Good Conduct Prisoners’ (Temporary Release) Act, 1962 (11 of 1962), Section 3, 4 – Constitution of India, Article 226 -- Parole – Rejection of – Reason assigned that the State Government or any officer authorised is satisfied that the release of the petitioner is likely to endanger the security of the State Government or maintenance of public order and there is a possibility of the petitioner indulging in heinous crime, if he is released on parole -- Recommendation for rejection being based upon no material on record, the impugned order cannot sustain specially when there is no other case pending against the petitioner – Writ allowed, petitioner ordered to be released on parole.

(Para 8, 9)

Punjab Good Conduct Prisoners’ (Temporary Release) Act, 1962 (11 of 1962), Section 3(1)(aa) -- Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), Section 392, 307, 302, 34 -- Constitution of India, Article 226/227 -- Parole -- State security and public order -- Apprehension that the release of the petitioner on parole could be dangerous to the State security and maintenance of public order in itself cannot be made a ground to reject the parole – Parole sought on the ground of serious illness of old aged mother granted.

(Para 3-8)

Constitution of India, Articles 226, 227 – Haryana Good Conduct Prisoners (Temporary Release) Act, 1988 (28 of 1988), Section 2 (d), 3 (1) (d) – Haryana Good Conduct Prisoners (Temporary Release) Rules, 2007, Rule 8 (iii) – Parole -- As per the jail records no new case was registered against the petitioner during the period he had been released on interim bail in the past – Court deemed it appropriate to grant parole to the petitioner for 3 weeks.

(Para 1-4)

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 482 -- Parole order – Modification in -- Bail bond before Jail authorities – Power of -- Applicant-petitioner was ordered to be released on parole to attend the marriage of his real sister subject to his furnishing requisite bail bonds to the satisfaction of Jail Authorities – Applicant-petitioner points out that there is no provision where the Superintendent of Jail can release any convict/inmate, without him furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the concerned Chief Judicial Magistrate/Illaqa Magistrate/Duty Magistrate – Order modified, requisite bail bonds/surety bonds to be furnished to the satisfaction of the concerned Chief Judicial Magistrate/Duty Magistrate/Illaqa Magistrate.

(Para 4-7)

Constitution of India, Article 226 -- Parole – Criminal writ petition -- On earlier parole, petitioner surrendered back on time and was not involved in any criminal activity – Present parole rejected -- It is disturbing that once a particular set of reasons have been specifically rejected by Court, the SSP has mentioned same reasons again -- 6 weeks' parole granted to the petitioner -- Respondent No.4 to file personal affidavit as to why identically same reasons were stated when first set of reasons had been rejected by High Court.

(Para 2-5)

Punjab Good Conduct Prisoners’ (Temporary Release) Act, 1962 (11 of 1962), Section 3, 4 – Constitution of India, Article 226 -- Parole – Rejection of – Speaking order – Requirement of -- Impugned order rejecting parole merely states that in case prisoner is released on parole, he might help smugglers and there is threat to peace and security of the State – Held said order is non-speaking in nature – Order set aside and case remitted to the same authority for decision afresh after affording opportunity of hearing to the parties -- Petitioner shall be at liberty to cite judgments he seeks to place reliance upon.

(Para 3)

Constitution of India, Article 226 -- Haryana Good Conduct Prisoners (Temporary Release) Act, 1988 (28 of 1988), Section 3, 4 -- Life imprisonment till death – Parole – Right of -- Temporary parole wrongly rejected only on the ground that petitioner is undergoing life imprisonment till natural death and is thus not eligible for temporary release on parole -- Writ petition allowed, petitioner's application for parole is remitted to the Commissioner to consider afresh in accordance with law.

(Para 10, 11)

A. Constitution of India, Article 226 -- Covid 19 pandemic situation -- Directions issued in suo motu PIL – Interim orders/directions/ protection – Extension of -- All the interim orders/directions issued or protection granted including any order requiring any compliance by the parties to such proceedings, passed by High Court or any other Court subordinate to it or any Family Court or Labour Court or any Tribunal or any other Judicial or Quasi-Judicial forum, over which High Court has power of superintendence, which are subsisting today shall stand extended till 30th June, 2021 -- If undue hardship and prejudice of any extreme nature, to any of the parties to such proceeding(s), such parties would be at liberty to seek appropriate relief by moving appropriate application(s) before the Competent Court(s), Tribunal, Judicial or Quasi-Judicial Forum.

(Para 2 (i), (xii))

B. Constitution of India, Article 226 -- Civil Suit – Extension of time for filing written statement -- Covid 19 pandemic situation -- Directions issued in suo motu PIL – Time for filing of written-statement or return in any Suit or proceeding pending before any Civil Court or any other forum, unless specifically directed, shall stand extended till 30th of June, 2021 -- It is however will not preclude the parties from filing such written-statement or return before 30th June, 2021.

(Para 2 (iii))

C. Constitution of India, Article 226 -- Execution of eviction, dispossession, demolition etc. -- Covid 19 pandemic situation -- Directions issued in suo motu PIL – Orders of eviction, dispossession, demolition, etc. passed by High Court or any Court subordinate to it or any Tribunal or Judicial or Quasi-Judicial forum, which have so far remained unexecuted, shall remain in abeyance till 30th of June 2021.

(Para 2 (iv))

D. Constitution of India, Article 226 -- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 438 -- Anticipatory bail – Interim protection -- Covid 19 pandemic situation -- Directions issued in suo motu PIL – Interim protection given in the anticipatory bail applications by the High Court or Court of Sessions for a limited period, which is likely to expire from now up to 30^th June, 2021, shall stand extended till 30th of June, 2021 -- However, any party aggrieved by the conduct of the accused on such interim protection, may move the Court over the matter for discontinuation of such interim protection, if any prejudice is caused to him/her, in which event, the Court concerned shall be entitled to take independent view of the matter.

(Para 2 (v))

E. Constitution of India, Article 226 -- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 439 – Interim bail -- Covid 19 pandemic situation -- Directions issued in suo motu PIL – All the interim bails granted under Section 439, Cr.P.C. by the High Court or Courts of Sessions, limited by timeframe specifying an expiry date from now up to 30th June, 2021, shall stand extended till 30th June, 2021, subject to the accused not abusing such liberty or else it may be cancelled at the instance of the State or the complainant, on application with adequate proof of the abuse of the liberty so granted by the Court concerned.

(Para 2 (vi))

F. Constitution of India, Article 226 -- Haryana Good Conduct Prisoners (Temporary Release) Act, 1988 (28 of 1988), Section 3,6 -- Punjab Good Conduct Prisoners’ (Temporary Release) Act, 1962 (11 of 1962), Section 3 – Parole – Extension of -- Covid 19 pandemic situation -- Directions issued in suo motu PIL – Parole granted to a person by order passed by a Court exercising the criminal jurisdiction and limited by time-frame specifying an expiry date from now up to 30th June, 2021, shall stand extended till 30th of June, 2021, subject to the accused not abusing such liberty or else it may be cancelled at the instance of the State or the complainant, on application with adequate proof of the abuse of the liberty so granted by the Court concerned.

(Para 2 (vi), (vii))

G. Constitution of India, Article 226 -- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 41A -- Cognizable offence – Arrest in -- Covid 19 pandemic situation -- Directions issued in suo motu PIL – Unless there is necessity of arrest for maintenance of law and order or any other emergent case, in a cognizable offence prescribing sentence up to seven years imprisonment, the police shall desist from arresting the accused up to 30th of June, 2021, without complying with the provision of Section 41A, Cr.P.C. -- This however may not be understood as an interdict on the power of the police to arrest, but should only be considered a mere advisory in the face of the ongoing crisis following second wave of Coronavirus.

(Para 2(viii))

H. Constitution of India, Article 226 – Eviction/ Demolition by government/ Corporation/ Council/ Board/ Panchayat etc. – Stay of -- Covid 19 pandemic situation -- Directions issued in suo motu PIL – State Governments, Union Territory, Chandigarh, or any of its Departments or any Municipal Corporation / Council / Board or any Gram Panchayat or any other local body or any other agency and instrumentality of the State shall not take any action for eviction and demolition in respect of any property, over which any citizen or person or party or any Body Corporate, has physical or symbolic possession as on today till 30th June, 2021.

(Para 2(ix))

I. Constitution of India, Article 226 – Auction sale by Bank/ Financial Institution -- Stay of -- Covid 19 pandemic situation -- Directions issued in suo motu PIL – Any Bank or Financial Institution shall not take action for auction in respect of any property of any citizen or person or party or any Body corporate till 30th June, 2021.

(Para 2(x))

J. Constitution of India, Article 226 – Covid 19 pandemic situation -- Directions issued to Government bodies in suo motu PIL – If the Government of Punjab, Haryana, Union Territory, Chandigarh, and/or any of its Departments and/or functionaries, Central Government and/or its departments or functionaries or any Public Sector Undertakings or any Public or Private Companies or any Firm or any individual or person is/are, by the order of this Court or any Court subordinate to it or the Tribunals, required to do a particular thing or carry out certain direction in a particular manner, in a time frame, which is going to expire at any time from now up to 30th June, 2021, the time for compliance of such order shall stand extended up to 30th June, 2021, unless specifically directed otherwise by the Court concerned.

(Para 2(xi))

Constitution of India, Article 226 -- Parole – Marriage of relative – Conviction in NDPS case – Relative whose marriage is statedly fixed is not very closely related to the petitioner, Court not inclined to pass any order to allow emergency parole -- However, in the interest of justice, the petitioner ordered to be sent to the venue of the marriage in custody.

(Para 5-7)

Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), Sections 302, 148, 149, 120-B – Murder accused -- Temporary release for marriage function -- Marriage of brother -- Presence of petitioner would be necessary – He is in custody for over 3 ½ years and is not involved in any other case -- Petition allowed,  Superintendent, Central Jail directed to send the petitioner from the Central Jail to the place of marriage at 7.00 am in police custody in a conveyance to be provided/paid for by the petitioner – He shall report back to the Central Jail, by 07.00 p.m. on the same day.

(Para 6)

Constitution of India, Article 226, 227 – Parole – Sickness of mother -- Habitual offender – Petitioner involved in other cases -- Medical history of the mother of the petitioner indicates that she is a chronic patient of liver disease and jaundice and was also diagnosed as case of severe urinary track infection -- Taking into account seriousness of disease, the Doctor has suggested good family care and treatment to save her life -- Petitioner granted eight weeks parole.

(Para 8)

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 446(3) -- Surety by old age parents for son in parole – Non-surrender by convict – Penalty of Rs. 2 lacs each imposed reduced to Rs.5,000/- each -- Convict failed to surrender and later on, he was found to be arrested in some other case and was in jail -- In view of the mitigating circumstances explained in the petition and considering the facts that the petitioners are old aged persons; their financial condition is not good; life convict already stands arrested in other case and has surrendered before the jail authorities; the petitioners are petty farmers, having meagre land holdings and the Covid-19 situation in country and also in view of the judgment rendered in Gopal Kaur’s case 2011 (6) RCR (Criminal) 1394, the penalty is reduced to Rs.5,000/- each.

(Para 12)

A. Punjab Good Conduct Prisoners’ (Temporary Release) Act, 1962 (11 of 1962), Section 3, 4, 6 -- Parole -- Apprehension of threat to the security and public order – Similar cases pending – Effect of -- Nothing on record to show that the conduct of the petitioner in jail has not been found good -- Petitioner has never been released on parole earlier -- No doubt, there are other cases pending or registered against the petitioner, yet the likelihood of her involvement in similar offence while on parole is not be taken as an active and real apprehension of threat to the security of the State or to the maintenance of public order – Petitioner ordered to be released on parole.

(Para 10, 12)

B. Punjab Good Conduct Prisoners’ (Temporary Release) Act, 1962 (11 of 1962), Section 3, 4 , 6 -- Last rites of husband – Parole – Right of -- Petitioner has sought the parole, enabling her to perform the last rites of her husband and to look after her family -- Petitioner has also tendered a panchayatnama -- Reasons given by the petitioner for her release on parole will fall within the ambit of “sufficient cause” and therefore, her request merits acceptance.

(Para 11)

Punjab Good Conduct Prisoners’ (Temporary Release) Act, 1962 (11 of 1962), Section 3 -- Punjab Good Conduct Prisoners’ (Temporary Release), Rules, 1963, Rule 3, 4 -- Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (61 of 1985), Section 15 -- NDPS case – Involvement in other NDPS cases -- Parole – Right of -- Two grounds on which parole has been denied; that petitioner is involved in other cases registered against him under the NDPS Act and secondly, there is an apprehension that if he is released on parole, he will engage in selling drugs to youth which will create a law and order problem – Impugned order set aside, respondents directed to release the petitioner on temporary parole for a period of 4 weeks subject to his furnishing bonds/surety with additional terms and conditions:

i. The petitioner shall furnish a mobile number to Superintendent Jail as well as the SHO of the police Station within whose jurisdiction the petitioner would be staying during the period of parole;

ii. The petitioner would also furnish an undertaking or surety to the effect that he will not indulge in any illegal activity in relation to drugs and intoxicants.

(Para 6,7)

Punjab Good Conduct Prisoners’ (Temporary Release) Act, 1962 (11 of 1962), Section 3, 4 – Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (61 of 1985), Section 18, 21, 25, 29 -- Arms Act, 1959 (54 of 1959), Section 25 -- Parole to meet family members -- Petitioner has been sentenced to R.I. for 12 years u/s 18/21/25 and 29 of the NDPS Act and Section 25 of the Arms Act -- Petitioner is not facing trial in any other case – Petitioner confined in jail over 5 years and 7 months and that there is nothing adverse on his conduct and behaviour in prison -- Petitioner be released on parole for 6 weeks.

(Para 2-5)

Punjab Good Conduct Prisoners’ (Temporary Release) Act, 1962 (11 of 1962), Section 3, 4 -- Parole for illness of mother -- Petitioner confined in prison since 2.9.2016 -- Jail conduct satisfactory -- Neither any jail offence nor any indication of his having involving himself in any other case – Mere apprehension that the petitioner may jump parole and may endanger maintenance of public law and order is not based on any material -- Court not satisfied with the reasons for the rejection – Petitioner ordered to be released on parole for a period of six weeks.

(Para 6-9)

Punjab Good Conduct Prisoners’ (Temporary Release) Act, 1962 (11 of 1962), Section 3, 4 – Parole – Rejection of -- Apprehension of disturbance of peace and danger to State security – Sustainably of – It is well settled that merely an apprehension that release of convict would result in disturbance of peace or danger to State security or the likelihood of the prisoner getting involved in more offences, if so, released on parole, is not, in itself, a ground to deny the benefit of parole – Petition allowed and the impugned order set aside – Petitioner ordered to be released on parole for four weeks.

(Para 4-6)