Court directed competent authority to grant one-month parole to petitioner-prisoner within three days, observing previous rejections on inconsistent hypothetical grounds.
Directs competent authority to release petitioner on parole for one month within three days.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Criminal Misc. No.M-32536 of 2008
-1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Criminal Misc. No.M-32536 of 2008 Date of decision : 10.12.2008
Sher Singh
. ....Petitioner
Versus
State of Haryana and others
...Respondents
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. D. ANAND
Present: Mr.Surya Kant Gautam, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr.S.S.Mor, Senior Deputy Advocate General, Haryana for the respondent.
S. D. ANAND, J.
This Court disposed of the earlier parole plea of the petitioner (Criminal Misc. No. M-24575 of 2008) on 23.10.2008 directing the competent authority to pass an order on the parole plea of the petitionerprisoner within one month from the date of the order. It was further directed that the competent authority shall pass an order in the light of the observations made by this Court. This Court had invalidated the factual premise noticed by the competent authority in earlier declining the parole plea of the petitioner.
Interestingly enough, the competent authority passed an order a day prior thereto i.e. 22.10.2008 declining the agriculture parole plea of the petitioner by observing his release on parole may give rise to any untoward incident 'with the convict' and there may be apprehension to 'the life of the convict'. The premise noticed by the competent authority is apparently hypothetical in character. The plea for release on parole had
Criminal Misc. No.M-32536 of 2008
-2-
********
been made by the prisoner himself.
In the circumstances of the case, it is directed that the competent authority shall release the petitioner-prisoner on parole for a period of one month by passing an order to that effect within three days from today. This Court is constrained to pass that order in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case when it has been found that previous parole plea was declined by the competent authority on one ground and, on the second occasion, it was declined on an altogether different ground. It will be for the State counsel to communicate the order to the competent authority.
Copy of the order be given to the learned State counsel under the signatures of the Court Secretary.
December 10, 2008 (S.D. ANAND) Pka JUDGE
Sher Singh
State of Haryana
S. D. ANAND
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
