Back
HARSH BUNGER
Dinesh – Appellant
Versus
State of Haryana – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner seeks a writ for parole. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. petitioner's conviction details and family background. (Para 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 3. denial of parole based on law and order concerns. (Para 7 , 8) |
| 4. petitioner's argument against rejection of parole. (Para 10 , 11) |
| 5. state's opposition based on public interest and past conduct. (Para 12 , 14) |
| 6. explanation of legal standards for parole eligibility. (Para 15 , 16 , 17) |
| 7. conceptual differences among law and order, public order, and state security. (Para 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23) |
| 8. petitioner’s satisfactory conduct warrants reconsideration of parole. (Para 24 , 25 , 27) |
| 9. court's view on the invalidity of the rejection order. (Para 28) |
| 10. court grants parole and quashes previous decision. (Para 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33) |
JUDGMENT
Harsh Bunger, J.
Petitioner (Dinesh) has filed this petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India, seeking a writ in the nature of mandamus directing respondents No.1 to 3 to release him temporarily on general parole for five weeks under Section 3 (1)(2) of the Haryana Good Conduct Prisoners (Temporary release) Act, 2022 (in short 'the Act, 2022), by setting aside the order dated 26
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 objections from the victim's family; solid evidence is required to substantiate claims of danger or public disorder.
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....
Releasing authority must independently assess parole applications beyond district non-recommendation; good conduct prisoners entitled to temporary release for family ties despite serious offence, abs....
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 serves to maintain family ties and facilitate rehabilitation; denial must be justified by substantial evidence of risk to public order or security.
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....
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
