Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KAINTHLA
Gajender Singh @ Pintu – Appellant
Versus
State of H.P. – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Rakesh Kainthla, J.
The petitioner filed an application for seeking parole on the ground that he intended to visit his aged parents, wife and children. They could not visit Nahan due to the considerable distance between their home and Nahan. This application was sent to the Superintendent of Police, District Meerut, who found the averment contained in the application regarding the illness of the petitioner’s father to be correct. He also found that the petitioner had an aged mother, a young wife and two children. He submitted that the petitioner was involved in the commission of a heinous offence and he would abscond in case of his release on parole. District Magistrate Meerut, stated in his report that in view of the report of the Senior Superintendent of Police, Meerut, the petitioner should not be released on bail. Director General of Prisons andCorrectional Services (respondent No.2) rejected the application of the petitioner vide letter dated 24.01.2025 on the ground that he had committed a heinous crime and would not surrender if released on parole.
2. The petitioner filed the present petition seeking direction to the respondents to supply a copy of the communication
Denial of parole cannot be based solely on the nature of the crime; it must consider security and public order, emphasizing the importance of maintaining family ties.
Parole applications cannot be denied solely based on the nature of the crime; substantial evidence of threat to security or public order is required for rejection.
Parole cannot be denied solely based on objections from the victim's family without substantial evidence; it's essential to balance prisoner rights with public safety.
Parole rejection invalid if solely based on offence nature without evidence of threat to state security or public order; releasing authority must independently assess good conduct and reform potentia....
Parole cannot be denied solely for heinous nature of offence; requires specific proof of threat to state security or public order, emphasizing reformation, family ties, and good prison conduct over c....
Parole cannot be rejected solely for heinous offence nature or reoffending apprehension if jail conduct satisfactory and reformation evident; must balance family ties, rehabilitation against public o....
Parole cannot be denied solely for heinous offence; must be based on endangering state security or public order. Good conduct, agricultural need, local support warrant grant despite non-recommendatio....
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 rejected solely for heinous nature of offence; must consider good conduct, reformation tendency, family ties maintenance, and absence of threat to public order or society.
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.
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
