Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
RAKESH KAINTHLA
Ranjeet Singh – Appellant
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. parole rejection despite good conduct and family ties. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. parties argue parole on conduct vs purpose validity. (Para 4 , 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 3. parole promotes convict reformation and social links. (Para 8) |
| 4. serious offence no bar if prisoner shows reformation. (Para 9) |
| 5. releasing authority independently decides, unbound by district. (Para 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15) |
| 6. rejection invalid for lacking application of mind. (Para 16) |
| 7. 28-day parole ordered with bonds and supervision. (Para 17 , 18 , 19) |
JUDGMENT :
Rakesh Kainthla, J.
The petitioner has filed the present petition for seeking a writ of Certiorari to quash the order dated 23.04.2025 and a writ of mandamus to direct the respondents to release the petitioner on parole for 42 days.
2. Briefly stated, the case of the petitioner is that he was convicted in F.I.R. No.189/2014, registered at Police Station Joginder Nagar, District Mandi, H.P. for the commission of an offence punishable under Section 20 of NDPS Act and sentenced to
undergo rigorous imprisonment for four years, pay a fine of Rs. 25,000/- and in default of payment of fine to further undergo simple imprisonment for six months. The petitioner h
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 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 objections from the victim's family; solid evidence is required to substantiate claims of danger or public disorder.
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.
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
