Convicts retain constitutional rights, including timely consideration for parole, essential for rehabilitation and preventing the erosion of fundamental rights under Article 21.

JUDGMENT :

HARPREET SINGH BRAR, J.

1. Present criminal writ petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India read with Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘ BNSS ’), wrongly mentioned as ‘BNS’, read with Section 3(1)(d) of the Punjab Good Conduct Prisoners (Temporary Release) Act, 1962 (for short ‘the Act’) seeking release of the petitioner on parole for a period of six weeks to meet his family members.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that in a case arising out of FIR No.73 dated 18.06.2020 under Section 22 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, registered at Police Station Talwandi Bhai, District Ferozepur, the petitioner was convicted and sentenced by learned Judge, Special Court, Ferozepur vide judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 01.05.2024 to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 10 years and to pay a fine of Rs.1.00 lakh along with default mechanism. As per custody certificate dated 07.07.2025, the petitioner has undergone actual sentence of 01 year, 08 months and 24 days. He further contends that on 16.09.2024, the petitioner had filed an application under the provisions of Section 3(1)(d) of the Act seeking temporary release on parole for eight weeks. However, almost 10 months have passed but no action has been taken on the said application, which is in violation of fundamental rights of the petitioner enshrined under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. It is further contended that the petitioner is a married person, having two children. Moreover, his mother is suffering from various age related ailments and he has filed the said application to provide emotional support and care to her. Learned counsel for the petitioner relies upon two judgments passed by the Division Bench of this Court in Joginder Singh Vs. State of Punjab , CRWP- 7506-2020 and Mahammad Shehbaz Vs. State of Punjab and others , 2022 (3) Law Herald (P&H) 2100 and submits that case of the petitioner is squarely covered by the said judgments.

3. Notice of motion.

4. Mr. Subhash Godara, Addl. A.G., Punjab, who is present in the Court, accepts notice on behalf of the respondents-State and submits that case of the petitioner for temporary release is pending consideration before the District Magistrate, Moga.

5. Reply by way of affidavit of Satnam Singh, Superintendent, Central Jail, Ferozepur, on behalf of respondent No.3 has been filed in the Court today, which is taken on record and copy thereof has been supplied to learned counsel for the petitioner.

6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and after perusing the record of the case with their able assistance, it transpires that the office of Superintendent, Central Jail, Ferozepur had forwarded the case of the petitioner to the District Magistrate, Moga vide letter no.8944 dated 16.09.2024. Further the office of the District Magistrate, Moga had sought a report from the office of Senior Superintendent of Police, Moga. However, it appears that the application of the petitioner for temporary release has been pending before the concerned authorities for the last 10 months.

7. The very object of the Act is humanitarian in nature. Providing opportunities for temporary release ensures that the ties between the prisoner and the society are not severed. Ensuring that the incarcerated have healthy roots in the society greatly assists in their rehabilitation and reintegration. It also incentivizes the inmates to maintain good conduct while in custody, that aids the jail authorities in administration as well.

8. It is deeply concerning that State agencies display such laxity in dealing with