Allowed

Ved Parkash v. State of Haryana & Anor.

Punjab & Haryana HC17 Feb 2009CRM-M/1261/2009

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a criminal miscellaneous petition under Section 482 CrPC, the court directed the State to consider the petitioner's case for premature release based on the policy applicable at the time of conviction, relying on Supreme Court precedents.

What did the court decide?

Directed respondents to consider the petitioner's case for premature release within one month as per policy at time of conviction.

Ved Parkash Vs State of Haryana & Anor. — Bail and Remand | Punjab & Haryana HC (2009)

¶1

-1-

¶2

Criminal Misc. No. M-1261 of 2009 (O&M)

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

¶5

Criminal Misc. No. M-1261 of 2009 (O&M) Date of Decision:17.02.2009

Ved Parkash

.....Petitioner

Vs.

The State of Haryana and others

¶10

.....Respondents

¶11

CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARBANS LAL

¶12

Present:Mr. Hoshiar Singh Jaswal, Advocate for the petitioner.

¶13

Mr. Amit Kaushik, Assistant Advocate General, Haryana. ****

¶14

JUDGMENT

¶15

HARBANS LAL, J.

¶16

This petition has been moved by Ved Parkash against State of Haryana and others under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for directing respondents to consider and decide his case for pre-mature release as per policy prevalent at the time of his conviction.

¶17

Reply filed on behalf of respondents No.1 to 3 is taken on

¶18

record.

¶19

I have heard the learned counsel for the parties, besides perusing the record with due care and circumspection. In re: State of

¶20

Haryana v. Mahender Singh and others, 2007 AIR Supreme Court

¶21

Weekly 6988 , the Apex Court has ruled that “A-fortiori, the policy-decision applicable in such cases would be one which was prevalent at the time of his conviction.” Further in re: State of Haryana v. Bhup Singh and others, 2009(1) Recent Criminal Reports (Criminal) 654, the Apex Court while considering an identical question observed as under:-

¶22

“We, therefore, are of the opinion that keeping in view the

¶23

Criminal Misc. No. M-1261 of 2009 (O&M) -2-

¶24

decision of this Court in Mahender Singh (supra), the impugned judgment should be modified directing the appellant to consider the cases of the respondents. It is, therefore, directed that if the respondents have not already been released, the State shall consider their cases in terms of the judgment of this Court in Mahender Singh's case (supra) having regard to the policy decision as was applicable on the date on which they were convicted and not on the basis of the subsequent policy decision of the year 2002.”

¶25

Adverting to the facts of the instant case, there is no gainsaying the fact that the petitioner was convicted and sentenced on 10.11.1997 in case FIR No.111 dated 8.2.1997 under Sections 307/302 of IPC registered at Police Station Shahbad, District Kurukshetra by the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Kurukshetra.

¶26

This petition is disposed of, with the direction to the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner in terms of the aforementioned judgments delivered in re: Mahender Singh and others' case (supra) as well as Bhup Singh and others' case (supra) , having regard to the policy decision as was applicable on the date on which he was convicted within one month from the date of receipt of the certified copy of this judgment. If the petitioner's case is covered by the policy decision applicable in his case, he may be released as per rules.

¶27

Disposed of accordingly.

¶28

February 17, 2009 ( HARBANS LAL ) renu JUDGE

¶29

Whether to be referred to the Reporter? Yes/No

Ved Parkash v. State of Haryana & Anor.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ved Parkash v. State of Haryana & Anor.

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

Tarun Verma Vs State of Haryana and Anr.

Ranjit Singh Vs State of Pb. etc.

Raj Kumar etc. Vs State of Haryana etc.

Jasmal and Ors. Vs State of Haryana

Narender Singh Vs State of Haryana and Ors.

Bhajan Singh@Fauji ` Vs State of Haryana and Ors.