IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Reserved on : 06.02.2025 Date of decision : 13.02.2025 Jasbir Singh @ Chirria ….Petitioner V/S State of Punjab and another ….Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAMIT KUMAR Argued by: Mr. Sehaj Punj, Advocate for Ms. Ritu Punj, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Anup Singh, A.A.G., Punjab.

****

NAMIT KUMAR , J.

1. The petitioner has filed the instant petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India seeking a writ in the nature of certiorari, quashing the order dated 26.08.2023 (Annexure P-1) passed by the Superintendent, Central Jail, Bathinda, rejecting the application filed by the petitioner for grant of parole of 08 weeks and for granting the parole to the petitioner for 08 weeks.

2. Brief facts of the case are that the petitioner was convicted in case FIR No.23 dated 17.04.1993 registered under Sections 302, 376(2)(g), 404, 379 & 34 of IPC at Police Station Dayalpura, District Bathinda by the learned Sessions Judge, Bathinda vide judgment dated

10.10.1996 and sentenced as follows : -

3. The petitioner was also convicted in case FIR No.85 dated

02.11.2001 registered under Sections 302 and 449 of IPC at Police Station Phul, District Bathinda by the learned Sessions Judge, Bathinda vide order dated 19.12.2003 and sentenced as follows : -

4. The petitioner had applied for grant of parole of 08 weeks which was rejected vide impugned order dated 26.08.2023 passed by learned Superintendent, Central Jail, Bathinda. The relevant portion of the said order reads as under :-

“You had given one application with regarding to your parole. In this regard, your are informed that you are undergoing Life Sentence under Section 302, 392, 376(2) (g) IPC. As per Section 2 of Punjab Good Conduct Prisoners (Temporary Release) Amendment Act, 2015 falls under the category of hardcore prisoners. Hence as per Section 4 of this Act, any offence which comes under the category of heinous offences, the prisoners shall not be entitled to temporary release.

Hence you are hereby informed that offence committed by you falls under heinous category as per Para 4, Sub Section 5-A(a) of Punjab Good Conduct (Temporary Release) Amendment Act, 2015 so your case cannot be considered for parole. It is for your information.”

5. Aggrieved against the abovesaid order, the petitioner has filed the instant petition.

6. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the Superintendent, Central Jail, Bathinda has rejected the request of the petitioner for grant of 08 weeks parole by passing an impugned order dated 26.08.2023 in an arbitrary manner on the ground that as per Section 2 of The Punjab Good Conduct Prisoners (Temporary Release) Amendment Act, 2015 (for short ‘2015 Act’), the petitioner falls under the category of ‘hardcore prisoner’ and as per Section 4 of 2015 Act, a prisoner, who has committed ‘heinous offence’, shall not be entitled for temporary release. He further submits that since the petitioner was convicted in the year 1996 and 2003, therefore, the amendment dated 07.01.2016 in 2015 Act would not apply in the case of the petitioner as the same would apply prospectively and not retrospectively. In support of his contention, learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance upon the judgment passed by Division Bench of this Court in CRWP- 1078-2014 titled as ‘Sonu @ Arun Vs. State of Haryana and others’ decided on 09.02.2015 and judgments passed by Single Bench of this Court in