The petitioner, convicted under the NDPS Act, sought parole under the Punjab Good Conduct Prisoners Act. The High Court rejected the plea as unfit due to pending cases and the petitioner's history as a habitual dealer.
None. Petition for parole is dismissed.
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.
-1-
Criminal Misc. No. M-3958 of 2009 (O&M)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Criminal Misc. No. M-3958 of 2009 (O&M) Date of Decision:11.02.2009
Mohan Chand
.....Petitioner
Vs.
State of Punjab and others
.....Respondents
CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARBANS LAL
Present:Mr. Munish Garg, Advocate for the petitioner.
JUDGMENT
HARBANS LAL, J.
This petition has been moved by Mohan Chand under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for setting aside the impugned order dated 4.12.2008 Annexure P.1 passed by respondent No.1 and for holding that the petitioner is entitled to temporary release under Section 3 of the Punjab Good Conduct Prisoners (Temporary Release) Act, 1962 for four weeks parole to meet the members of his family and to attend his ailing aged parents.
The brief facts are that the petitioner was involved in the case registered vide FIR No.157/1998 under the provisions of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short, `the Act'). He was convicted and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten years under the Act. He has completed all the short terms of imprisonment. Vide order dated 4.12.2008, respondent No.1 has rejected his prayer for grant of parole. In these premises, the impugned order be set aside and he may be released on parole for the period of four weeks.
Criminal Misc. No. M-3958 of 2009 (O&M)
-2-
I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner.
As per Annexure P.1, the order dated 4.12.2008 passed by the Director General of Police, the District Magistrate did not recommend release of the petitioner on parole. The SSP in his report has stated that as many as four more cases under the Act are pending against him. It is further mentioned that the petitioner is a habitual dealer in narcotics and the cases have also been registered against his father. Taking into consideration the entirety of these facts, I do not deem it a fit case to grant parole to the petitioner as sought for. Sequelly, this petition is dismissed.
February 11, 2009 ( HARBANS LAL ) renu JUDGE
Whether to be referred to the Reporter? No
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petitioner is entitled to temporary release under Section 3 of the Punjab Good Conduct Prisoners (Temporary Release) Act, 1962 for four weeks parole.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Mohan Chand
State of Punjab and others
Harbans Lal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
