SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2020 Supreme(P&H) 196

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Arun Kumar Tyagi, J.
Sanjeev Kumar - Appellant
Versus
State Of Haryana & Ors. - Respondents
CRWP-532-2020
Decided On : 11-02-2020

Advocates Appeared:
Mr. Ravinder Bangar, Advocate, for the Appellant; Mr. Arjun Singh Yadav, AAG Haryana, for the Respondents

The main legal point established is that possession of a mobile phone does not automatically classify a prisoner as hardcore, and legal bars on temporary release must be applied judiciously.

Headnote:

Parole - Hardcore Prisoner - Haryana Good Conduct Prisoners (Temporary Release) Act, 1988 - Section 2(aa), Section 3, Section 5A - The court allowed the petition and issued a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to release the petitioner on parole for a period of two weeks, highlighting the legal provisions and their interpretations.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner sought parole for his sister's daughter's marriage. The respondents objected based on the petitioner's previous misconduct and classification as a hardcore prisoner.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the petitioner's possession of a mobile phone did not automatically classify him as a hardcore prisoner and that the legal bar on temporary release did not apply to him. The court also held that the petitioner could not be denied parole based on apprehension of breach of peace or previous misconduct.

Issues: The issues involved the petitioner's eligibility for parole, classification as a hardcore prisoner, and the grounds for denying parole.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that mere possession of a mobile phone did not warrant classification as a hardcore prisoner and that the legal bar on temporary release did not apply to the petitioner. The court also ruled that apprehension of breach of peace or previous misconduct could not be grounds for denying parole.

Final Decision: The court allowed the petition and issued a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to release the petitioner on parole for a period of two weeks.

JUDGMENT

Arun Kumar Tyagi, J. - The petitioner-Sanjeev Kumar has filed present petition under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus for directing the respondents to release the petitioner on four weeks parole for marriage of Neha-daughter of his sister scheduled to be held on 15/16.02.2020.

2. The petitioner was convicted and sentenced by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Kurukshetra to undergo life imprisonment and to pay fine of Rs.50,000/- and in case of default of payment of fine to further undergo imprisonment for three years in case FIR No.128 dated 24.06.2006 registered under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short 'the IPC') and Section 25 of the Arms Act, 1959 at Police Station Kurukshetra University, District Kurukshetra vide judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 05.08.2008. His Appeal CRA-D-613-DB-2008 was dismissed by this Court on 12.12.2013. The petitioner was further convicted and sentenced to undergo life imprisonment and to pay fine of Rs.65,000/- and in case of default of payment of fine to further undergo imprisonment for two years and six months in case FIR No.138 dated 20.07.2006 registered under Sections 302 and 201 read with Section 34 of the IPC and Section 25 of the Arms Act, 1959 at Police Station Taraori, District Karnal by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Karnal vide judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 26.05.2009. The petitioner, who is presently confined in District Jail, Karnal, has filed the present petition for issuance of writ of mandamus directing grant of parole.

3. The petitioner has averred in the petition that marriage of Neha, daughter of his sister, has been fixed with Virender from Ambala. The ladies sangeet will be performed on 15.02.2020 and the reception of Barat will be on 16.02.2020 at Community Hall, Near Sector-5, Kurukshetra Road, Pipli and the Bhat Ceremony will be performed before the marriage. Father of the petitioner has already expired. The petitioner has to perform the Bhat Ceremony and has to arrange the money, clothes and other necessary things and for the said purposes the petitioner requires four weeks parole. The mother of the petitioner also made a representation dated 01.01.2020 for parole of the petitioner to respondent No.4 who did not take any action on the same. The Sarpanch of the village Mirchaheri, District Kurukshetra has given certificate that there will be no disturbance of peace in the village if the petitioner gets parole. The case of the petitioner is covered under Section 3(1)(b) of the Haryana Good Conduct Prisoners (Temporary Release) Act, 1988. Therefore, writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to release him on four weeks parole may be issued.

4. Vide order dated 20.01.2020, notice of the petition was given to the respondents.

5. Short affidavit dated 31.01.2020 of Sh. Ajay Kumar, HPS, DSP, Kurukshetra was filed on behalf of Superintendent of Police, Kurukshetra admitting the fact of marriage but objecting to grant of parole on the ground of the petitioner committing heinous crime and misusing the parole.

6. Reply by way of affidavit dated 03.02.2020 of Sh. Sher Singh, Superintendent of Prison, District Prison, Karnal was filed on behalf of the respondents. In the said reply, it has been mentioned that a mobile phone was recovered from the petitioner on 26.06.2016 at the time of his confinement at District Jail, Yamuna Nagar regarding which FIR No.381/2016 under Section 42 of the Prisons Act was registered at Police Station City Jagadhri against the petitioner in which the petitioner was convicted and sentenced to the period already undergone by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Yamuna Nagar vide order dated 24.05.2017. The petitioner falls in the category of hard core prisoner as per Section 2(aa)(iv) of the Haryana Good Conduct Prisoners (Temporary Release) Act, 1988. It has been further mention

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

AI

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top