ORDER :

1. This writ petition has been filed by Vishal Bansal, challenging order dated 17th April, 2021 (Annexure P-3), whereby the application of the petitioner for grant of parole has been rejected by the Director General, Prison and Correctional Services, Himachal Pradesh.

2. It is contended that the petitioner was arrayed as accused in case FIR No. 26/2016, dated 26.03.2016, registered with Police Station Gagret, District Una, for the offences under Sections 302, 392, 341, 120B and 201 of the Indian Penal Code. It is further contented that the petitioner had applied for anticipatory bail, which was dismissed by this Court and subsequently by the Hon’ble Supreme Court. However, the petitioner surrendered before this Court on 16.06.2016 pursuant to the order of the Hon’ble Supreme Court passed in SLA (Crl) No. 4371 of 2016 and faced trial. He was eventually convicted for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 392, 201, 341 and 120B of IPC vide judgment dated 20th February, 2020 by the Additional Sessions Judge-1, District Una, H.P. Ever since he surrendered before this Court on 16.06.2016, he is in jail and thus, has completed incarceration of more than 5 years and 4 months. The application of the petitioner for regular parole has been dismissed by the Director General, Prison and Correctional Services, Himachal Pradesh on 17th April, 2021 on the ground that the District Magistrate has not recommended so.

3. Mr. Pankaj Sawant, learned Counsel for the petitioner, argues that the petitioner has a family comprised of his old aged mother, wife and two minor daughters. He further argues that the wife of the petitioner has also filed a petition under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, for divorce against the petitioner due to his inability to maintain her and their children. The petitioner wants to maintain and develop good relationship with his wife and make arrangements for the maintenance of his wife and children. He also wants to look after his old aged mother. For all these reasons, he had submitted application dated 27.08.2020 for grant of parole through proper channel. Respondent No. 4-the Superintendent of Jail, Model Central Jail, Nahan, District Sirmour, (HP) had duly recommended his case for release on parole. But the same has been mechanically rejected by respondent No. 2-the Director General, Prison Correctional Services Officer at Shimla. The District Magistrate in his report has stated that during verification, the statement of concerned Pradhan NAC Gagret namely Kiran Bala W/o Sh. Shyam Verma, UP Pradhan NAC Gagret, mother of life convict have been recorded. He has recommended against release of the petitioner on parole as the son of the deceased had raised objection against release of the petitioner on parole and expressed the apprehension that if the petitioner is released on parole, he may abscond. It is contended that there is no justification for such apprehension, particularly when the Superintendent Jail, Model Central Jail, Nahan, in Columns No. 13 and 17 of his report (Annexure P-5) has categorically recorded that the conduct of the petitioner in jail has throughout been satisfactory and there is no pending case against him. It is denied that the petitioner was absconding during trial. In fact, he had availed his right to apply for anticipatory bail upto the Supreme Court and was eventually allowed to surrender before this Court.

4. The learned Counsel for the petitioner in support of his submissions has relied upon the judgment passed by a Division Bench of this Court in CWP No. 663 of 2020, titled as Sajid vs. State of Himachal Pradesh and Others, decided on 29th June, 2020, in which case also, parole application of the petitioner seeking parole was rejected on the basis of non-recommendation of the District Magistrate, but later on, he was granted parole on the basis of his incarceration for about seven years and his good conduct in jail, with a rider that his parole would be liable to be cancelled,