IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision:08.01.2025 Narender @ Vicky …Petitioner vs.

State of Haryana and others …Respondents Coram : Hon’ble Mr. Justice N.S.Shekhawat Present: Mr. Baljeet Nain, Advocate for the petitioner.

Ms. Sheenu Sura, Deputy Advocate General, Haryana.

***

N.S.Shekhawat J. (Oral)

1. The petitioner has filed the present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a Writ in the nature of Mandamus directing the respondents No.2 to 5 to release the petitioner on parole for a period of six weeks, so as to enable him to make proper arrangements for the operation of his old aged mother, who is suffering from severe stomach pain and is undergoing treatment from PGIMS, Rohtak.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner was convicted in a criminal case bearing FIR No.187, dated 27.07.2024, under Sections 302, 148, 149,499,307 of IPC, registered at Police Station Meham, District Rohtak and was sentenced to undergo life imprisonment. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the father of the petitioner has already expired and his mother Smt.Ishwanti, aged about 71 years is living with him. His elder brother Surender lives separately with his family and does not take care of his mother. By referring to the medical record (Annexure P-1) issued by PGIMS, Rohtak, learned counsel submits that the mother of the petitioner is suffering from severe stomach pain and is undergoing treatment from PGIMS, Rohtak. Even, now the surgery has been advised by the doctors, but there is no one to take care of his mother and to provide her proper medical treatement and care. Learned counsel furhter submits that the petitioner had moved an application dated 08.11.2024 to the Superintendent District Jail, Rohtak, however, no action has been taken on the said application. Thus, the presence of the petitioner is required at home to make arrangements of funds for proper treatment of his old mother. He further contends that earlier also the petitioner had availed the concession of parole/furlough and had surrendered before the jail authorities in time. Even, no other criminal case is pending against the present petitioner and the petitioner has always maintained good conduct inside and outside the jail. Since, the mother of the petitioner is seriously ill and there is no other family member, the petitioner is entitled to be released on parole, in view of the provisions contained in Section 3 of the Haryana Good Conduct Prisoner’s (Temporary Release) Act,1962 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act”)

3. On the other hand learned State counsel has vehemently opposed the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner on the ground that the petitioner was earlier granted 10 weeks regular parole and he could only avail 3/4 weeks furlough in a calender year as per the Section 4 of the “Act”. The petitioner had already availed 10 weeks regular parole with effect from 12.03.2024 to 22.05.2024 in the calender year i.e.2024, he was not entitled to be released on any kind of regular parole/furlough in the said year. However, she admits that the elder brother of the petitioner, aged about 50 years is living separately from his mother Smt. Ishwanti. Even, sister of the petitioner namely Anju, aged about 40 years is happily residing in her matrimonial home and the mother of the petitioner is living in the house of present petitioner only.

4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 5. Section 3 of the “Act” provides for entitlement of a convict for temporary release and the same has been reproduced below:-

3. Temporary release of prisoners on certain grounds.

(1) The State Government may, in consultation with the District Magistrate or any other officer appointed in this behalf, by notification in the Official Gazette and subject to such conditions and in such manner as may be prescribed, release temporarily for a period specified in sub-

section