Allowed¶15

Davinder Singh Alias Baba v. State of Punjab and Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC10 Mar 2026CRWP/1792/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

CRWP-1792-2026, Punjab & Haryana HC (Chandigarh), decided 10.03.2026 by Justice Anoop Chitkara. Davinder Singh @ Baba v. State of Punjab. Quashing under Article 226 of unreasoned order dated 31.12.2025 rejecting parole under the Punjab Good Prisoners (Temporary) Release Act; rejection rested on apprehension of sale of intoxicants disturbing peace; fresh decision directed from Deputy Commissioner-cum-District Magistrate, Hoshiarpur within 15 days. Keywords: parole, temporary release, good prisoners, non-speaking order, natural justice.

What did the court decide?

Petition allowed; impugned parole-rejection order dated 31.12.2025 set aside; respondent No.2 directed to pass a fresh order within 15 days. ¶15

Davinder Singh Alias Baba Vs State of… — Writ and Judicial Review | Punjab & Haryana HC (2026)

¶1

207 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶2

CRWP-1792-2026 Date of Decision: 10.03.2026

¶3

Davinder Singh @ Baba

¶4

...Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

State of Punjab and others …Respondents

¶7

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP CHITKARA

¶8

Present: Mr. A.P.S. Rehan, Advocate for the petitioner.

¶9

Mr. Akshay Kumar, A.A.G., Punjab. ****

¶10

ANOOP CHITKARA, J.

¶11

Seeking quashing of impugned order dated 31.12.2025 passed by respondent No.2 whereby parole of the petitioner has been rejected under the Punjab Good Prisoners (Temporary) Release Act, the petitioner has come up before this Court by filing the present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

¶12

Counsel for the petitioner submits that vide order dated 31.12.2025 passed by Deputy Commissioner-cum-District Magistrate, Hoshiarpur (Annexure P-2), the parole of the petitioner was rejected based on the report that if the petitioner is released on parole, he may indulge in selling intoxicating substances, which can disturb the peace and order of the area.

¶13

Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner undertakes not to indulge in any crime and if he commits any offence which prescribes sentence for more than 03 years, then such factor should be considered while granting subsequent parole.

¶14

Perusal of the order reflects that there is no reasoning in the order that how petitioner’s release is threat to law and order, as such order dated 31.12.2025 passed by Deputy Commissioner-cum-District Magistrate, Hoshiarpur (Annexure P-2) is set aside. Respondent No.2 is directed to pass a fresh order within a period of 15 days.

¶15

Petition stands allowed. All pending applications, if any, stand disposed of.

¶16

(ANOOP CHITKARA) JUDGE

¶17

10.03.2026 Jyoti Sharma Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes Whether reportable: No.

¶18

JYOTI SHARMA 2026.03.11 17:52 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment High Court, Sector 1, Chandigarh

¶19

Davinder Singh Alias Baba v. State of Punjab and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Davinder Singh Alias Baba v. State of Punjab and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Gautam through Maternal Grand Mother Ram Kala Vs Gopi Chand

Amar Singh Thro Lr Vs Mukhtiar Singh & Ors.

Guriqbal Singh @ Vicky Sekhon Vs State of Punjab

Mohd Sanjay Alias Jaggu Vs the State of Ut Chandigarh and Others

Sonu Kumar Vs Kulbir Singh

Lovedeep Singh Vs State of Punjab