Punjab-Haryana High Court
Dhanna Ram vs State Of Haryana And Others on 1 November, 2010
Author: Ram Chand Gupta
Bench: Ram Chand Gupta
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
Crl. Writ Petition No. 1784 of 2010(O&M)
Date of Decision: November 1, 2010.
Dhanna Ram
...... PETITIONER(s)
Versus
State of Haryana and others.
...... RESPONDENT (s)
CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAM CHAND GUPTA
Present: Mr. R.K.Bagga, 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 to quash the order dated 30.08.2010 of respondent No.2, Annexure P2, vide which the request of petitioner for his release on agricultural parole for six weeks under Section 3(1)(c) of the Haryana Good Conduct Prisoners (Temporary Release) Act, 1988 (for short the 'Act') was declined.
Reply has been filed on behalf of respondent-State. CRWP No.1784 of 2010 2 I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the whole record.
Petitioner was convicted and sentenced to undergo R.I. for 10 years for offence under Section 18 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 in case FIR No.243 dated 11.09.1990, P.S. Sadar Ambala.
It has been contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that he applied for his release on agricultural parole under Section 3(1)(c) of the Act. It was duly recommended by District Magistrate, Jodhpur and however, the same was declined by competent authority i.e. Divisional Commissioner, Ambala Range, Ambala merely on the ground that he had already availed parole in the recent past i.e. from 24.02.2010 to 25.03.2010. It has been stated by learned counsel for the petitioner that now about seven months have expired since the petitioner returned from earlier parole.
Section 3 of the Act provides that a convict be released on parole 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 CRWP No.1784 of 2010 3
(c) the temporary release of the prisoner is necessary for ploughing, sowing or harvesting or carrying on any other 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."CRWP No.1784 of 2010 4
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 to endanger the security of the State or the maintenance of the public order. However, in the present case, the request of the petitioner for his release on parole has not been rejected on any of the grounds mentioned in Section 6 of the Act. Rather his release was rejected on the ground that he had recently availed parole from 24.02.2010 to 25.03.2010. Now a period of seven months have expired since the petitioner returned from earlier parole. His case was duly recommended by Superintendent, Central Jail, Ambala and District Magistrate, Jodhpur.
Hence, in view of these facts, the present petition is accepted to the extent that respondents are directed to reconsider the case of the present petitioner for his release on parole in the light of the observations made by this Court, as per Act and Rules and instructions on the point, within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.
Disposed of accordingly.
( RAM CHAND GUPTA ) November 1, 2010. JUDGE 'om'