Abhishek @ Shekhu vs State Of Himachal Pradesh And Others on 2 August, 2023

[Cites 12, Cited by 3]

Himachal Pradesh High Court

Abhishek @ Shekhu vs State Of Himachal Pradesh And Others on 2 August, 2023

Bench: Tarlok Singh Chauhan

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH
AT SHIMLA

CWP No. 4351 of 2023

Decided on: 2nd August, 2023
__________________________________________________________

Abhishek @ Shekhu

....Petitioner

of
Versus

State of Himachal Pradesh and others
rt ......Respondents

Coram
The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Tarlok Singh Chauhan, Judge
The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ranjan Sharma, Judge

1 Whether approved for reporting? Yes

For the petitioner: Mr. Sunil Kumar and Mr. Pankaj

Sawant, Advocates.

For the respondents: Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate
General with Mr. Yash W.
Chauhan, Senior Additional

Advocate General,Mr. Ramakant
Sharma, Additional Advocate
General, Mr. J.S. Guleria and
Ms. Priyanka Chauhan, Deputy
Advocates General.

1
Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment?

::: Downloaded on - 04/08/2023 20:32:50 :::CIS
-2-

Ranjan Sharma, Judge (Oral)

Petitioner, namely, Abhishek @ Shekhu, .

convicted under Sections 377 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 6 of the Prevention of Children from Sexual Offenses Act, here-in-after referred to as the POCSO Act, 2012 by the Learned Special Judge, Fast Track Special of Court, under POCSO Act, Kangra at Dharamshala, sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for 10 years rt and to pay fine of Rs.10,000/- (Rs. Ten thousand only), in default of payment of fine, further to undergo simple imprisonment for four months; and after undergoing sentence of one year eleven months and ten days, has come up, in the instant writ petition, with the following prayers:-

(i) That this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue writ in the nature of certiorari, thereby quash and set-aside the Annexure P-2 dated 23.05.2023 in the interest of justice and fair play.

(ii) That this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue writ in the nature of mandamus, thereby directing the ::: Downloaded on - 04/08/2023 20:32:50 :::CIS -3- respondents to release the petitioner on parole for the period of 42 days for agriculture work, in the facts and .

circumstances of the present case.

FACTS:

2.(i) The case of the petitioner is that an F.I.R. No. 93 of 2018 was registered in Police Station Jawali, District of Kangra, H.P. under Sections 377, 506 IPC and Section 6 of the POCSO Act; and the resultant Sessions Trial No. 261 of rt 2018 was conducted/adjudicated by the Learned Special Judge, Fast Track Special Court, under POCSO Act, Kangra at Dharamshala, as per judgement dated 31.1.2022 convicting and sentencing the petitioner to undergo simple imprisonment for ten years and to pay fine of Rs.10,000/-

(Rs.Ten thousand only) and in default of payment of fine, further to undergo simple imprisonment for four months.

2(ii) The conviction and sentence, as aforesaid, was assailed before this Court in Cr. Appeal No. 20 of 2022 titled as Abhishek Mohammad @ Shekhu Vs. State of H.P. which is pending adjudication.

2(iii) While undergoing sentence, at Lala Lajpat Rai, ::: Downloaded on - 04/08/2023 20:32:50 :::CIS -4- District and Open Air Correctional Home Dharamshala, District Kangra, the petitioner applied for parole for .

agricultural purposes on 30.11.2022 (Annexure P-1) for 42 days but this request was rejected by Additional Director General, Prisons and Correctional Services, Himachal Pradesh on 23rd May, 2023 (Annexure P-2) due to non-

of recommendation of his case by the District Authorities as per the letter dated 1st March, 2023 (Annexure P-3), rt primarily in view of the statement of the victim's mother Mrs. Meera Devi (Annexure R-2/T), who stated that the petitioner is a criminal type of person and intimidates and stalks her son Raghav and if the petitioner was released on parole, it may lead to an unpleasant incident. In this background the petitioner has assailed the impugned order dated 23.05.2023 (Annexure P-2) rejecting his request for grant of parole.

REPLY/STAND OF RESPONDENTS:

3. Respondents 1 to 4, have filed a reply, on affidavit of Mr. Anand Partap Singh, Additional Director General of Prisons and Correctional Services, Himachal ::: Downloaded on - 04/08/2023 20:32:50 :::CIS -5- Pradesh, Shimla, sworn on 27th July, 2023, praying for the dismissal of the writ petition, (i) as the mother of the victim .

has raised an objection (Annexure R-2/T) for temporary release (parole) of the petitioner; (ii) the grant of parole is a privilege and cannot be claimed as a right; and (iii) release of the petitioner is likely to endanger the security of the of State or the maintenance of public order.

4. We have heard Mr. Sunil Kumar and Mr. Pankaj rt Sawant, Advocates, for the petitioner and Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General with Mr. Yash W.Chauhan, Sr. Additional Advocate General for the respondents/State.

LEGAL POSITION:

5(i). At the outset, it would be relevant to take note of the pronouncement of the Hon'ble Apex Court in Asfaq vs. State of Rajasthan and others, (2017) 15 Supreme Court Cases 55. The Apex Court has enunciated the object of granting parole to a convict. It has been emphasized that the parole is granted with an objective of reformation of the convicts. The convicts have right to breathe fresh air, albeit for short periods. The main purpose of parole is to ::: Downloaded on - 04/08/2023 20:32:50 :::CIS -6- provide humanistic approach towards those lodged in jails, so that parole can prepare these offenders for success.

.

Relevant paragraphs of the judgement read as thus:-

"11. There is a subtle distinction between parole and furlough.

A parole can be defined as conditional release of prisoners i.e. an early release of a prisoner, conditional on good behaviour and regular reporting to the of authorities for a set period of time. It can also be defined as a form of conditional pardon by which the convict is released before the expiration of his term. Thus, the rt parole is granted for good behaviour on the condition that parolee regularly reports to a supervising officer for a specified period. Such a release of the prisoner on parole can also be temporarily on some basic grounds. In that eventuality, it is to be treated as mere suspension of the sentence for time being, keeping the quantum of sentence intact. Release on parole is designed to afford some relief to the prisoners in certain specified exigencies. Such paroles are normally granted in certain situations some of which may be as follows:

(i) a member of the prisoner's family has died or is seriously ill or the prisoner himself is seriously ill; or

(ii) the marriage of the prisoner himself, his son, daughter, grandson, grand daughter, brother, sister, sister's son or daughter is to be celebrated; or

(iii) the temporary release of the prisoner is necessary for ploughing, sowing or harvesting or carrying on any other agricultural operation of his land or his father's undivided land actually in possession of the prisoner; or ::: Downloaded on - 04/08/2023 20:32:50 :::CIS -7-

(iv) it is desirable to do so for any other sufficient cause;

(v) parole can be granted only after a portion of sentence is already served;

.

(vi) if conditions of parole are not abided by the parolee he may be returned to serve his sentence in prison, such conditions may be such as those of committing a new offence; and

(vii) parole may also be granted on the basis of aspects related to health of convict himself.

of xxx... xxx.... xxx... xxx...

15. A convict, literally speaking, must remain in jail for the rt period of sentence or for rest of his life in case he is a life convict. It is in this context that his release from jail for a short period has to be considered as an opportunity afforded to him not only to solve his personal and family problems but also to maintain his links with society. Convicts too must breathe fresh air for at least some time provided they maintain good conduct consistently during incarceration and show a tendency to reform themselves and become good citizens. Thus, redemption and rehabilitation of such prisoners for good of societies must receive due weightage while they are undergoing sentence of imprisonment.

xxx... xxx.... xxx... xxx...

17. From the aforesaid discussion, it follows that amongst the various grounds on which parole can be granted, the most important ground, which stands out, is that a prisoner should be allowed to maintain family and social ties. For this purpose, he has to come out for ::: Downloaded on - 04/08/2023 20:32:50 :::CIS -8- some time so that he is able to maintain his family and social contact. This reason finds justification in one of the objectives behind sentence and punishment, .

namely, reformation of the convict. The theory of criminology, which is largely accepted, underlines that the main objectives which a State intends to achieve by punishing the culprit are: deterrence, prevention, retribution and reformation. When we recognise reformation as one of the objectives, it provides of justification for letting of even the life convicts for short periods, on parole, in order to afford rt opportunities to such convicts not only to solve their personal and family problems but also to maintain their links with the society. Another objective which this theory underlines is that even such convicts have right to breathe fresh air, al beit for periods. These gestures on the part of the State, along with other measures, go a long way for redemption and rehabilitation of such prisoners. They are ultimately aimed for the good of the society and, therefore, are in public interest.

18. The provisions of parole and furlough, thus, provide for a humanistic approach towards those lodged in jails. Main purpose of such provisions is to afford to them an opportunity to solve their personal and family problems and to enable them to maintain their links with society. Even citizens of this country have a vested interest in preparing offenders for successful re- entry into society. Those who leave prison without strong networks of support, without employment prospects, without a fundamental knowledge of the ::: Downloaded on - 04/08/2023 20:32:50 :::CIS -9- communities to which they will return, and without resources, stand a significantly higher chance of failure. When offenders revert to criminal activity upon .

release, they frequently do so because they lack hope of merging into society as accepted citizens. Furloughs or parole can help prepare offenders for success.

19. Having noted the aforesaid public purpose in granting parole or furlough, ingrained in the reformation theory of sentencing, other competing public interest has also of to be kept in mind while deciding as to whether in a particular case parole or furlough is to be granted or rt not. This public interest also demands that those who are habitual offenders and may have the tendency to commit the crime again after their release on parole or have the tendency to become threat to the law and order of the society, should not be released on parole. This aspect takes care of other objectives of sentencing, namely, deterrence and prevention. This side of the coin is the experience that great number of crimes are committed by the offenders who have been put back in the street after conviction. Therefore, while deciding as to whether a particular prisoner deserves to be released on parole or not, the aforesaid aspects have also to be kept in mind. To put it tersely, the authorities are supposed to address the question as to whether the convict is such a person who has the tendency to commit such a crime or he is showing tendency to reform himself to become a good citizen.

20. Thus, not all people in prison are appropriate for grant of furlough or parole. Obviously, society must isolate ::: Downloaded on - 04/08/2023 20:32:50 :::CIS

- 10 -

those who show patterns of preying upon victims. Yet administrators ought to encourage those offenders who demonstrate a commitment to reconcile with society .

and whose behaviour shows that aspire to live as law-

abiding citizens. Thus, parole program should be used as a tool to shape such adjustments.

21. To sum up, in introducing penal reforms, the State that runs the administration on behalf of the society and for the benefit of the society at large cannot be unmindful of of safeguarding the legitimate rights of the citizens in regard to their security in the matters of life and liberty. rt It is for this reason that in introducing such reforms, the authorities cannot be oblivious of the obligation to the society to render it immune from those who are prone to criminal tendencies and have proved their susceptibility to indulge in criminal activities by being found guilty (by a Court) of having perpetrated a criminal act. One of the discernible purposes of imposing the penalty of imprisonment is to render the society immune from the criminal for a specified period. It is, therefore, understandable that while meting out humane treatment to the convicts, care has to be taken to ensure that kindness to the convicts does not result in cruelty to the society. Naturally enough, the authorities would be anxious to ensure that the convict who is released on furlough does not seize the opportunity to commit another crime when he is at large for the time-being under the furlough leave granted to him by way of a measure of penal reform.

22) Another vital aspect that needs to be discussed ::: Downloaded on - 04/08/2023 20:32:50 :::CIS

- 11 -

is as to whether there can be any presumption that a person who is convicted of serious or heinous crime is to be, ipso facto, treated as a hardened criminal.

Hardened criminal would be a person for whom it has become a habit or way of life and such a person would necessarily tend to commit crimes again and again.

Obviously, if a person has committed a serious offence for which he is convicted, but at the same time it is also found that it is the only crime he has committed, he of cannot be categorised as a hardened criminal. In his case consideration should be as to whether he is rt showing the signs to reform himself and become a good citizen or there are circumstances which would indicate that he has a tendency to commit the crime again or that he would be a threat to the society. Mere nature of the offence committed by him should not be a factor to deny the parole outrightly. Wherever a person convicted has suffered incarceration for a long time, he can be granted temporary parole, irrespective of the nature of offence for which he was sentenced. We may hasten to put a rider here, viz. in those cases where a person has been convicted for committing a serious office, the competent authority, while examining such cases, can be well advised to have stricter standards in mind while judging their cases on the parameters of good conduct, habitual offender or while judging whether he could be considered highly dangerous or prejudicial to the public peace and tranquillity etc.

23. There can be no cavil in saying that a society that believes in the worth of the individuals can have the ::: Downloaded on - 04/08/2023 20:32:50 :::CIS

- 12 -

quality of its belief judged, at least in part, by the quality of its prisons and services and recourse made available to the prisoners. Being in a civilized society .

organized with law and a system as such, it is essential to ensure for every citizen a reasonably dignified life. If a person commits any crime, it does not mean that by committing a crime, he ceases to be a human being and that he can be deprived of those aspects of life which constitute human dignity. For a prisoner all of fundamental rights are an enforceable reality, though restricted by the fact of imprisonment. {See - Sunil rt Batra (II) v. Delhi Administration (1980) 3 SCC 488, Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India and Another (1978) 1 SCC 248, and Charles Sobraj v. Superintendent Central Jai, Tihar, New Delhi (1978) 4 SCC 104.}

24. It is also to be kept in mind that by the time an application for parole is moved by a prisoner, he would have spent some time in the jail. During this period, various reformatory methods must have been applied. We can take judicial note of this fact, having regard to such reformation facilities available in modern jails.

One would know by this time as to whether there is a habit of relapsing into crime in spite of having administered correctional treatment. This habit known as "recidivism" reflects the fact that the correctional therapy has not brought in the mind of the criminal. It also shows that criminal is hardcore who is beyond correctional therapy. If the correctional therapy has not made in itself, in a particular case, such a case can be rejected on the aforesaid ground ::: Downloaded on - 04/08/2023 20:32:50 :::CIS

- 13 -

i.e. on its merits."

(underlining ours) 5(ii). So far as Respondents/State is concerned, the .

State legislature had enacted "The Himachal Pradesh Good Conduct Prisoners (Temporary Release) Act, 1968" here-in-

after referred to as the "Act", which provides for temporary release of the prisoners on certain conditions. Section 3 of and Section 6 of the Act, read as under:-

"3. Temporary release of prisoners on certain grounds.- rt (1) The Government may, in consultation with the District Magistrate 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 Government is satisfied that,-

(a) a member of the prisoner's family has died or is seriously ill; or

(b) the marriage of the prisoner'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 agricultural operation on his land and no friend of the prisoner or a member of the prisoner's family is prepared to help him in this behalf in his absence; or

(d) it is desirable so to do for any other sufficient cause. (2). The period for which a prisoner may be released shall be determined by the Government so as not to exceed,-

(a) Where the prisoner is to be released on the ground ::: Downloaded on - 04/08/2023 20:32:50 :::CIS

- 14 -

specified in clause (a) of sub-section (1), two 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

(3) The period of release under this section shall not count towards the total period of the sentence of a prisoner. (4) The Government may, by notification, authorise any of officer to exercise its power under this section in respect of all or any of the grounds specified therein." rt

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 Government or an officer authorised 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."

5(iii) In exercise of powers conferred under Section 10 of the Act, Respondents/State framed "The Himachal Pradesh Good Conduct Prisoners (Temporary Release) Rules, 1969" here-in-after referred to as the Rules. The relevant portion of the Rule 3 reads as under:-

::: Downloaded on - 04/08/2023 20:32:50 :::CIS

- 15 -

"3. Procedure for temporary release. -

(1) A prisoner desirous of seeking temporary release under section 3 or section 4 of the Act shall make an .

application in Form 'A-1' , Form 'A-2' , as the case may be, to the Superintendent of Jail. Such an application may also be made by an adult member of the prisoners' family.

(2) The Superintendent of Jail shall forward the application of of a prisoner within 24 hours of its receipt along with his report to the District Magistrate of the district to which the convict belongs. The District Magistrate rt before making any recommendations shall, with the consultation of the Superintendent of Police, verify the facts and grounds on which temporary release has been requested and shall also give their opinion whether the temporary release on parole/furlough is opposed on ground of prisoner's presence being dangerous to the security of State or prejudicial to the maintenance of Public Order. The District Magistrate shall complete the process of consultation with the Superintendent of Police and forward his recommendations within one week to the Inspector General of Prisons (Releasing Authority) together with report of Superintendent Jail, who shall decide the parole/furlough case ordinarily within a period of three days from the date of receipt of the recommendations of the District Magistrate. In the event of the serious illness of close relation i.e. father, mother, brother, sister, spouse or child of the prisoner, the application should be processed more expeditiously. However in the event of death of the ::: Downloaded on - 04/08/2023 20:32:50 :::CIS

- 16 -

close relation i.e. father, mother, brother, sister, spouse or child of the prisoner, the Superintendent of the Jail shall also be the competent authority to release a .

prisoner on parole for a period not exceeding fifteen days.

The Superintendent of Jail should release a prisoner on parole immediately on receipt of a death certificate, provided he satisfies himself independently within reasonable time about the genuineness of the of certificate. For satisfying himself he will approach the concerned Police Station by wireless and verify about rt the truth of the death and the exact relation of the prisoner with the deceased in order to ascertain the nearness of the relationship.

The Superintendent of Jail shall also take into consideration the prisoner's past criminal history and behaviour in the prison since admission as recorded in his case file and the likelihood of his not abusing the concession of parole, if granted.

The Superintendent of Jail shall without fail submit the case file of the prisoner to whom parole is thus granted, to the Inspector General of Prisons enabling him to ensure that the Superintendent has used proper discretion in effecting the release."

5(iv) A perusal of Section 3 of the Act and Rule 3 of the Rules aforesaid stipulate that a convict (prisoner) can seek temporary release for specified period for the purpose of carrying out the ploughing, sowing, harvesting or ::: Downloaded on - 04/08/2023 20:32:50 :::CIS

- 17 -

carrying on any other agricultural operation on his land, or on any other sufficient cause, besides other grounds, as .

mentioned therein. Rule 3 of the Rules provides for the procedure as to the manner in which the application for parole is to be processed, examined and decided by the competent authorities. Section 6 of the Act bars the of release of the prisoners in specified eventualities whether the release is likely to endanger the security of the State or rt the maintenance of the public order.

ANALYSIS 6(i) In the instant case, the documents placed on record make it manifestly clear that the mandate of the Act and the Rules framed thereunder have not been followed in its true perspective. The District Magistrate was required to apply his impartial and independent mind as to whether the petitioner can be recommended for temporary release or not. The decision for release or denial of release has to be in terms of Section 6 of the Act. This aspect is missing in the present case. The statement given by the mother of the victim, namely, Meera Devi (Annexure R-2/T) cannot be ::: Downloaded on - 04/08/2023 20:32:50 :::CIS

- 18 -

the sole ground for denying the parole to the petitioner.

The objection raised by the victim's mother was required to .

have been considered by the District Magistrate, vis-à-vis the provisions of Sections 3 and 6 of the Act and the Rules and also the objective of parole as propounded by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Asfaq's case, referred to above. In case, of the statement of the victim's mother is made the sole basis for denying the parole to the petitioner, then no convict/ rt prisoner would ever be able to get the parole and moreover when a perusal of custody certificate (Annexure P-5) reveals that the conduct of the petitioner in Jail was satisfactory and nothing adverse was ever reported against him. In addition to this, the Pradhan, Gram Panchayat Palohada, (Annexure P-4) has given no objection for the release of the petitioner. One more aspect needs to be taken note that once the respondent-State has not placed any cogent and convincing material on record to justify that the release of the petitioner is likely to endanger the security of the State or the maintenance of public order then, the rejection orders denying the parole, on the face of ::: Downloaded on - 04/08/2023 20:32:50 :::CIS

- 19 -

it is unsustainable.

6(ii). In the backdrop of Para 6(i) supra, the Co-

ordinate Bench of this Court, in CWP No.3516 of 2021, titled as Virender Kumar@Bindu Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and others decided, on 23.07.2021, and Para 5 thereof, strengthens, the claim of petitioner for grant of of parole. Para 5 is reproduced hereinbelow:-

"5. In the instant case, the documents placed on record rt make it manifestly clear that the procedure prescribed under the Act and the Rules framed thereunder has though been followed by the respondents, but only mechanically. The Additional District Magistrate has not expressed his objective satisfaction in not recommending release of the petitioner. He has only expressed that victim's father and the local police has objected for petitioner's release on parole. The District Magistrate's report should be comprehensive and not mechanical reproduction of the police report and the statements of victim's family members. The District Magistrate is required to apply his impartial and independent mind as to whether the petitioner can be recommended for temporary release or not. The satisfaction has to be in terms of Section 6 of the Act. This aspect is missing in the case. The objection raised by the father of the victim may have its own merit and cannot be brushed aside, but at the same time, this objection cannot be accepted as a sole ground for ::: Downloaded on - 04/08/2023 20:32:50 :::CIS

- 20 -

denying parole to the petitioner. The objection has to be considered viz-a-viz provisions of Sections 3 and 6 of the Act and the Rules framed thereunder. If the .

objection of the father of the petitioner is to be accepted without looking into the provisions of the Act and the Rules, then probably the petitioner will never be able to get the parole. In the present case, father of the victim raised the following objection(s) :-

"Stated that I am resident of the aforesaid address.

of Ravinder Kumar was my elder son who was killed/murdered by Virender Kumar alias Bindu, son of Mehar Chand, resident of village Saloa, upon which a rt case was registered against him and the Court had convicted him. He, at the moment, is undergoing the imprisonment in Dharamshala jail. I have come to know that he has applied for 90 days' parole. If he comes out on parole, then me and my family object to the same. Hence, he should not be granted parole."

Victim's father has not expressed any apprehension of threat from the petitioner, but has simply objected to petitioner's release. The objection of victim's father is understandable as his son was murdered by the petitioner, but the fact cannot be lost sight of that the petitioner has remained in custody for the last more than five years. He has not been released even once. There is no complaint about his behavior and conduct in the prison. The petitioner is not a history sheeter. His character has been vouched by the Gram Panchayat. However, the Gram Panchayat has not taken full responsibility for the petitioner in case of his release on ::: Downloaded on - 04/08/2023 20:32:50 :::CIS

- 21 -

parole. All these aspects and their effect on the decision of petitioner's application for parole in light of Section 6 of the Act and the Rules have not been deliberated by .

the District Magistrate in his report.

Considering all the above aspects and for the foregoing reasons, we dispose off present petition by granting liberty to the petitioner to apply afresh for parole in accordance with law. In such an eventuality, the District Magistrate shall submit his report based on his of independent satisfaction and assessment of the entire situation and in terms of provisions of the Act and the rt Rules. The certificate of Gram Panchayat accepting full responsibility for the petitioner during the period of release, if any, submitted by the petitioner shall be given its due weightage. Imposing stringent conditions like confining petitioner's visit to specific places, restricting his movements, his reporting to nearest police station every alternate day etc. during period of parole, can also be considered in case of acceptance of petitioner's prayer."

(underlining ours) 6(iii). Even as per judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court, in Asfaq's case, and the judgement of the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in case of Virender Kumar @ Bindu, supra, we hold that the statement of the victim's mother, namely, Meera Devi (Annexure R-2/T), in absence of any cogent and supportive material, cannot be sole ground for denying ::: Downloaded on - 04/08/2023 20:32:50 :::CIS

- 22 -

parole to the petitioner. At the same time, it goes without saying that the apprehension, if any, can be safeguarded .

by imposing stringent conditions/stricter standards while granting temporary release/parole, so as to enable the petitioner to breathe fresh air and to enable him to be part of rehabilitation and correctional therapy within family and of in society. Moreover, the conduct and behaviour of the petitioner, while in custody was satisfying and nothing rt adverse was reported against him. Further the Pradhan, Gram Panchayat Palohada (Annexure P-4) has no objection for grant of parole.

CONCLUSION AND DIRECTIONS:

7. In view of the above discussion, the instant writ petition is allowed, with the following directions:-

(i) Order dated 23.05.2023 (Annexure P-2) rejecting the request, of the petitioner for parole, is quashed and set-aside.

(ii) Respondents are directed to reconsider the case for extending concession of parole, in favour of the petitioner, for a period of 42 ::: Downloaded on - 04/08/2023 20:32:50 :::CIS

- 23 -

days, as requested, on his furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with two .

sureties in the sum of Rs.25,000/- each, to the satisfaction of Superintendent of Jail, Lala Lajpat Rai, District and Open Air Correctional Home Dharamshala, District Kangra, of Himachal Pradesh. It is also made clear that the petitioner shall surrender before the rt Superintendent of Jail, Lala Lajpat Rai, District and Open Air Correctional Home Dharamshala, District Kangra, on expiry of 42 days parole period. In case the petitioner breaches any of the conditions of the parole order or creates any law and order problem, then, the respondents are free to cancel the parole and take action in accordance with law.

(iii) In peculiar facts and circumstances, herein, respondents are at liberty to impose any other just and reasonable condition, in addition to the conditions mentioned in Para 7(ii), supra, ::: Downloaded on - 04/08/2023 20:32:50 :::CIS

- 24 -

if deemed fit and proper to meet the ends of justice.

8. The instant writ petition is allowed in the aforesaid terms. Pending application(s), if any, are also disposed of.


                                         (Tarlok Singh Chauhan)




                                 of
                                                   Judge



                  rt                           (Ranjan Sharma)
                                                    Judge

    August 02, 2023
         (TM)








                                           ::: Downloaded on - 04/08/2023 20:32:50 :::CIS

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Himachal Pradesh High Court