A life convict seeking emergency parole on medical grounds on the eve of completing one year of imprisonment failed to establish eligibility under Rule 4 of the Haryana Good Conduct Prisoners (Temporary Release) Rules, 2007.
No immediate parole granted; petitioner permitted to file fresh application after one year imprisonment.
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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Crl.W.P. No.2041 of 2010 (O&M)
DATE OF DECISION: NOVEMBER 12, 2010
Bijender
.....PETITIONER
Versus
The State of Haryana and others
....RESPONDENTS
CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SATISH KUMAR MITTAL HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE JORA SINGH
Present: Mr.A.S. Trikha, Advocate, for the petitioner.
SATISH KUMAR MITTAL, J.
The petitioner, who is a life convict and undergoing sentence in District Jail, Bhiwani, has filed the instant petition for issuing directions to the respondents to release him on emergency parole for four weeks on the ground of his treatment.
Admittedly, the petitioner was convicted by Addl. Sessions Judge, Bhiwani on 7.12.2009 for an offence under Section 302 IPC and sentenced for life. Rule 4 of the Haryana Good Conduct Prisoners (Temporary Release) Rules, 2007 (hereinafter referred to as the Rules') clearly stipulates that a prisoner shall be entitled to apply for parole only after he has completed one year of his imprisonment after the conviction and has earned his first annual good remission under the Haryana Good Conduct Prisoners (Temporary Release) Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as the Act'). Since till date the petitioner has not completed one year of his imprisonment after the conviction, therefore, his case does not fall under Rule 4 of the Rules and as such, at this stage, the prayer made by the
Crl.W.P. No.2041 of 2010 -2-
petitioner to release him on emergency parole for four weeks on the aforesaid ground, cannot be accepted. In view of the said fact, we are not inclined to entertain this petition for issuing direction to the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for grant of parole on the aforesaid ground.
Dismissed.
However, it will be open for the petitioner to move a fresh application for release on parole after expiry of the requisite period of imprisonment of one year after his conviction. In case any such application is filed, we hope that the authorities will consider the same in accordance with law, under the provisions of the Act.
(SATISH KUMAR MITTAL) JUDGE
November 12, 2010 vkg
( JORA SINGH ) JUDGE
2 issues framed by the court
Whether a life convict eligible for emergency parole after one year of imprisonment can claim release upon treatment grounds before completing that mandatory period.
Whether the High Court can issue directions for parole when statutory restrictions under the Haryana Good Conduct Prisoners (Temporary Release) Rules, 2007 are not satisfied.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Bijender
The State of Haryana
Satish Kumar Mittal
Jora Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
