Back
RANJAN SHARMA, VACATION
Prakash Kumar – Appellant
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Ranjan Sharma, J.—Petitioner, Prakash Kumar, a convict has come up before this Court, seeking his temporary release-parole, with the following relief(s):—
“(i) That the respondents may kindly be directed to release the petitioner on parole for a period of 28 days.”
Factual Matrix:
2. Case as set-up by Learned Counsel is that for offences under Sections 21 & 22 of the Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act [hereinafter referred to as ‘ND&PS Act’], the petitioner was convicted and sentenced on 06.09.2023, by Learned Special Judge, Mandi Division, District Mandi [HP], for rigorous imprisonment for 20 years and to pay a fine of Rs. 2,00,000/-[Rupees Two Lakh], with a default punishment also.
2(i). Facts, as indicated in instant petition, is that mother of the petitioner is critical and she is hospitalized and under treatment in Civil Hospital, Panchkula, which is borne out from the treatment summary and photographs placed on records. It is averred that the petitioner has a brother who is deaf and dumb and petitioner has one daughter and a wife and there is no other male member so as to take care of the mother and to extend facilities as may be required at this stage.
2(
Parole – Convicts have right to breathe fresh air for short periods – Any objection raised by local inhabitants/relative cannot be sole determinative basis for refusing parole.
Parole serves to maintain family ties and facilitate rehabilitation; denial must be justified by substantial evidence of risk to public order or security.
Parole is a conditional release aimed at the reformation of convicts, and denial based solely on non-recommendation by authorities without substantial justification is impermissible.
Parole cannot be denied solely based on the nature of the crime if the convict exhibits good conduct and a tendency to reform, ensuring the maintenance of family ties is critical.
Parole cannot be denied solely based on the nature of the conviction; maintaining family ties and demonstrating good conduct are paramount for rehabilitation and reform.
Parole cannot be denied solely based on objections from the victim's family; solid evidence is required to substantiate claims of danger or public disorder.
The nature of the offence alone cannot be a sole ground for denying parole. The authorities should consider rehabilitation, continuity of life, and constructive hopes for convicts and prisoners in de....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the mere conviction for a serious and heinous offence cannot be the sole ground for denying parole, and that parole should be granted by takin....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
