Back
PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH
Sureshwar Thakur, Lalit Batra
Achan Kumar – Appellant
Versus
State Of Punjab – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Sureshwar Thakur, J.
Through the instant petition, the petitioner seeks the quashing of the order dated 6.3.2024 (Annexure P-1), passed by respondent No. 3, whereby the petitioner's prayer for his becoming released, on parole for a period of eight weeks, has been declined. The petitioner also seeks the relief of parole under Sections 3 and 4 of the Punjab Good Conduct Prisoners' (Temporary Release) Act, 1963 (for short 'the Act of 1963').
2. The present petitioner has been convicted and sentenced by the learned trial Court concerned, to undergo life imprisonment, in case bearing FIR No. 06 of 4.2.2017, registered under Section 302/34 of the IPC, at Police Station Begowal. The above made verdict of conviction, and, consequent thereto sentence(s) (supra), as became imposed upon the convict, has been challenged by him through his rearing a criminal appeal bearing No. CRA-D-697 of 2021, before this Court.
3. During the pendency of the appeal (supra) before this Court, the convict preferred an application, claiming thereins the relief of his becoming released on parole, lasting upto a duration of eight weeks, rather for the relevant purpose. The authority concerned, after eliciti
Unauthorized possession of a mobile phone by a prisoner, without a conviction, cannot justify the denial of parole, upholding principles of fair trial under Article 21.
The court upheld the DPAC's discretion in denying parole, emphasizing the need for valid concerns regarding law and order and the applicability of the old Parole Rules of 1958.
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 offence; must be based on endangering state security or public order. Good conduct, agricultural need, local support warrant grant despite non-recommendatio....
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 – Convicts have right to breathe fresh air for short periods – Any objection raised by local inhabitants/relative cannot be sole determinative basis for refusing parole.
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 the nature of the conviction; maintaining family ties and demonstrating good conduct are paramount for rehabilitation and reform.
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
