Himachal Pradesh High Court
Govind vs State Of Hp on 20 November, 2024
Author: Vivek Singh Thakur
Bench: Vivek Singh Thakur
Govind vs State of HP CWP No. 11597 of 2024 20.11.2024 Present: Mr. Goerge, Advocate, for the appellant.
Mr. Manoj Chauhan, Additional Advocate General, for the respondent.
It has been noticed that quantum of petitions under Article 226 of Constitution of India preferred for enlargement of prisoners in Himachal Pradesh on parole is increasing day-by-day. Further that instructions/response thereto of the respondents, except facts of criminal case, is also stereotyped.
Sometimes, application is not being considered for months together and the same is considered and rejected and/or decision of rejection is communicated only after filing of petition in this Court.
It has also been noticed that prisoners apply for parole on certain grounds but Authorities seldom respond to the reasons cited in applications for parole, and cause of rejection normally in all cases is also same but on the ground(s) which is/are not available under the Act and Rules, referred before us, for rejection of application for parole.
We feel that if such practice is continued then the High Court shall become the Parole Granting Forum/Court.
It appears that benefit of parole is extended to the prisoners only after interference of the Court. If it is so, then such prisoners, who believe in the System, shall be sufferer for not approaching the Court by invoking the extraordinary discretionary jurisdiction of the High Court under Article 226 of Constitution of India.
Therefore, before proceeding further, we consider it appropriate to have some data/information from the respondents/State.
Accordingly, respondents are directed to impart complete instructions through learned Additional Advocate General with respect to following information for the period w.e.f. 01.09.2023 to 31.08.2024:-
(a) How many applications were received for regular parole and emergency parole in all Jails of Himachal Pradesh;
(b) How many such applications for regular and emergency parole were allowed;
(c) How many prisoners, after rejection of applications, had approached the Court;
(d) How many prisoners approach the Court for delay in accepting or rejecting such application;
(e) How many prisoners were released on parole in furtherance to the orders passed by Court;
(f) Cause for non-adherence of the procedure and time-line prescribed under the Act/Rules/Manual for processing consideration and deciding the application for parole provided in relevant provisions in Himachal Pradesh Good Conduct Prisoners (Temporary Release) Act, 1968; H.P. Good Conduct Prisoners (Temporary Release) Rules, 1969 and Prison Manual;
(g) Cause for not responding to the ground stated for seeking parole;
(h) Permissible maximum number of prisoners, if any, provided under relevant Act, Rules and Manual, if any, for extending benefit of parole simultaneously;
(i) Relevant provision.
The aforesaid information be produced/placed on record by next date.
Learned counsel for petitioner and learned Additional Advocate General are also directed to assist the Court whether parole can be claimed as a matter of right, the relevance of no objection/objection certificate issued by the concerned Gram Panchayat and victim's family for granting/rejecting the parole of prisoner, right of prisoner viz-a-viz right of victim as well as with respect to relevant provision of the Act, Rules, Manual and instructions/Guidelines, if any, regulating the application for parole.
List for consideration on 29th November, 2024.
(Vivek Singh Thakur)
Judge
November 20, 2024 (Rakesh Kainthla)
(ms) Judge