Back
RITU BAHRI, KULDEEP TIWARI
Harvinder Singh Alias Goggi – Appellant
Versus
State of Punjab – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petition for parole under relevant laws. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. arguments over denial of parole. (Para 3 , 5) |
| 3. details of pending cases and acquittal. (Para 4 , 6) |
| 4. analysis of reasons for declining parole. (Para 7 , 8) |
| 5. order granting parole under conditions. (Para 9 , 10) |
JUDGMENT
Mr. Kuldeep Tiwari, J. (Oral)
The present petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India read with Section 482 Cr.P.C. for the grant of parole for 8 weeks under Section 3(1)(d) of the PUNJAB GOOD CONDUCT PRISONERS TEMPORARY RELEASE ACT , 1962.
2. The petitioner has been convicted by the learned trial Court vide order dated 15.1.2021 and has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 10 years and to pay a fine of Rs.1,00,000/- and in default of payment of fine, to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year under Sections 18 and 21 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985. The petitioner has preferred a statutory Criminal Appeal No. CRA-D-212-DB-2021 against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 15.1.2021 which is pending for adjudication. The petitioner had applied for temporary parole for a pe
The court established that denial of parole requires substantial evidence of potential danger to public order, not just apprehensions based on prior convictions.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the rejection of parole should be based on solid reasons and material, and not on surmises and conjectures. The court emphasized the right to ....
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
