Allowed

Dhani Ram v. State of Hp and Ors.

Himachal Pradesh HC20 Nov 2024CWP/12696/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Convict in an NDPS case sought parole for his brother's marriage and agricultural work; authorities rejected it citing police apprehension with no supporting material. The High Court set aside the rejection and granted 28 days' parole subject to bond and sureties.

What did the court decide?

28 days' parole on personal bond Rs.1,00,000 with two sureties of Rs.50,000 each; rejection of parole application set aside.

Dhani Ram Vs State of Hp and Ors. — Narcotics (NDPS) | Himachal Pradesh HC (2024)

¶1

( 2024:HHC:11867 )

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA

¶3

CWP No.12696 of 2024 Date of decision: 20.11.2024

¶4

Dhani Ram …Petitioner. (presently lodged in Model Central Jail, Kanda) Versus State of H.P. & Others …Respondents

¶5

Coram

¶6

Hon’ble Mr. Justice Vivek Singh Thakur, Judge. Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rakesh Kainthla, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?

¶7

For the Petitioner. Mr. Sunil Kumar, Advocate. For the Respondents : Mr. Manoj Chauhan, Additional Advocate General.

¶8

Vivek Singh Thakur, Judge (Oral)

¶9

Petitioner has approached this Court seeking parole for agricultural purpose as well as on account of marriage of his brother going to be solemenized from 22.11.2024 to 23.11.2024.

¶10

2. Petitioner is convict and serving sentence in case FIR No.117/2021 dated 09.12.2021, registered under Section 20 of NDPS Act at Police Station Anni, District Kullu, Himachal Pradesh, in execution of judgment and order dated 05.07.2023, passed by learned Special Judge-II, Kinnaur at Rampur Bushahr, District Shimla, Himachal

¶11

( 2024:HHC:11867 )

¶12

¶13

Pradesh. After conviction petitioner was admitted to the prison and thereafter petitioner has completed about more than one year and four months of imprisonment.

¶14

3. Petitioner had applied for his enlargement on parole for agricultural purpose vide application dated 26.06.2024 (Annexure P-2) which has been rejected by the concerned authority, i.e. Director General, Prisons & Correctional Services, Himachal Pradesh for nonrecommendatoin of the District Authorities concerned, which was communicated vide letter dated 19.09.2024( Annexure-C with instructions dated 18.11.2024).

¶15

4. In the instructions, ground for non-recommendation is that local police has objected release of the petitioner on parole for apprehension of repetition of the same crime by the petitioner. Nothing has been placed on record to substantiate such apprehension of the police.

¶16

5. Copy of Invitation Card of marriage of brother of petitioner has been palced on record as (Annexure P-1). In instructions placed on record by the respondent-State, the said fact has not been disputed.

¶17

6. Chapter-XIX of Prison Manual dealing with ‘Parole and Furlough’ provides provision for Marriage parole and Regular parole as provided in para 19.03.1 and 19.03.2, which read as under:-

¶18

( 2024:HHC:11867 )

¶19

¶20

“19.03.1 Emergency parole under police protection: to cater to the familal and social responsibilities of emergent nature like death/serious illness/marriage of a family member or other close relative.

¶21

19.03.2 Regular parole: to take care of the familal and social obligations and responsibilities of regular nature as well as for the psychological and other needs of the prisoner to maintain contact with the outside world like house repair, admission of children to school/college, deliver of wife, sowing and harvesting of crops, etc.”

¶22

7. Section 3(1)(b) & 3(1)(c) of Himachal Pradesh Good Conduct Prisoners (Temporary Release) Act, 1968, provides enlargement of prisoners on parole on ground of marriage of prisoner’s son or daughter and for carrying on agricultural operation in the land of the petitioner.

¶23

8. Though in the Act, there is no reference of enlarging a petitioner on parole for marriage of brother but in Chapter-XIX of Prison Manual there is a provision of Emergency parole for attending the marriage of family members or other close relatives.

¶24

9. “Member of prisoner’s family” has been defined in Section 2(c) of the Act which includes brothers and sisters of the prisoners also. 10. Learned counsel for the petitioner by referring pronouncements of the Supreme Court as well as co-ordinate Benches is of this High Court, in case titled Asfaq Vs. State of Rajasthan and others (2017) 15 SCC 55, judgment dated 16.10.2023 passed in CWP No.5965 of 2023, titled as Retaish Kumar Vs. State of H.P. & others,

¶25

( 2024:HHC:11867 )

¶26

¶27

judgment dated 09.10.2023 in CWP No.6562 of 2023, titled as Pushap Raj Vs. State of H.P. & others, judgment dated 23.05.2023 passed in CWP No.1710 of 2023, titled as Bihari Lal Vs. State of H.P. & others and judgment dated 23.07.2021 passed in CWP No.3516 of 2021, titled as Virender Kumar @ Bindu Vs. State of H.P. and others, has advocated that for similar circumstances petitioner is also entitled for release on parole and rejection of his application on the alleged apprehnesion of police is not sustainable in absence of any material to substantiate the same.

¶28

11. Learned Additional Advocate General, on the basis of instructions placed on record, has failed to point out any material to substantiate the plea for which parole application of the petitioner has been rejected.

¶29

12. Taking into consideration material placed before us and pronouncement referred hereinabove, in peculiar facts and circumstances of the present case, we are of the view that parole application filed by the petitioner has been rejected wrongly and erroneously and, therefore, we set aside the rejection of the parole application filed by the petitioner referred in present matter, which was communicated to the petitioner vide communication dated 19.09.2024 placed on record as Annexure-C alongwith the instructions dated 18.11.2024 filed on behalf of respondents-State.

¶30

( 2024:HHC:11867 )

¶31

¶32

13. Accordingly, respondents are directed to extend benefit of parole to the petitioner for a period of 28 days on his furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- with two sureties in the sum of 50,000/- each to the satisfaction of Superintendent Jail, Model Central Jail, Kanda, District Shimla, H.P and also subject to other applicable terms & conditions contained in parole order to be passed by the concerned authority. The petitioner shall surrender before Superintendent of Jail, Model Central Jail, Kanda, District Shimla, H.P., immediately on expiry of 28 days of parole.

¶33

14. For extending benefit of parole, requisite appropriate order shall be issued by competent authority in accordance with law immediately. However, the petitioner’s parole shall be liable to be cancelled in case he breaches any of the conditions of the parole order and/or creates law and order problem, which shall be treated as a negative factor for consideration of his similar prayers in the future.

¶34

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

¶35

(Vivek Singh Thakur), Judge.

¶36

(Rakesh Kainthla), Judge.

¶37

20^th Nov, 2024.

¶38

(munish)

¶39

SUBHASH CHAND DHIMAN

¶40

Digitally signed by SUBHASH CHAND DHIMAN DN: C=IN, O=HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, OU=HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH SHIMLA, Phone=3418061207364d8c002725dfc58ff116f678c3d39289db29b992cce875905119, PostalCode=171001, S=Himachal Pradesh, SERIALNUMBER=5ce240fac0e1267843f29509683d09a9912af10edc4e6cd2ed5d4a8c30134c 1b, CN=SUBHASH CHAND DHIMAN Reason: I am the author of this document Location: Date: 2024-11-21 09:43:02

Dhani Ram v. State of Hp and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dhani Ram v. State of Hp and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Nirmal Kaur Vs State

Vipan Kumar Vs Babita Kumari

State of Hp Vs Jaswinder Singh

Anil Kumar Alias Nilu Vs State of Hp

State of Hp Vs Sonia Singh and Anr.

Karam Chand Vs Sonia Singh