IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision: 16.02.2026 Nachhatar Singh ......Petitioner Versus State of Punjab and others ...... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA PARTAP SINGH Present: Mr. Vjay Lath, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Jasdev Singh Thind, DAG, Punjab.

SURYA PARTAP SINGH , J . (Oral) :

This order of mine shall dispose of the writ petition filed by the petitioner whereby the release of petitioner on parole on medical ground has been sought.

2. Heard.

3. It has been contended on behalf of petitioner that petitioner is undergoing sentence for the commission of offence punishable under Section 15 of Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, by virtue of judgment of conviction dated 29.09.2011, passed by the learned Judge Special Court, (NDPS), Rupnagar. According to learned counsel for the petitioner by virtue of order on quantum of sentence, of an even date, the petitioner has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 14 years and to pay of fine of Rs.1,50,000/-. As per learned counsel for the petitioner the petitioner has already served sentence for a period of more than 7 years and 07 months and that he is suffering from paralysis which has rendered him incapable of performing even the necessary daily activities. As per learned counsel for the petitioner due to old age and ailments it is necessary that the benefit of parole be afforded to the petitioner. The learned counsel for the petitioner has further contended that with regard to above, an application was moved by the petitioner. but without application of mind the same has been dismissed.

4. It has been contented on behalf of petitioner that in view of grounds mentioned in the petition, on humanitarian ground and otherwise also, the petitioner is entitled for interim parole at least for a period of 8 weeks.

5. A prayer of the same has been made accordingly.

6. A perusal of record shows that in response to notice, the learned State counsel has placed on record the short reply by way of affidavit of Mr. Manpreet Singh Dhillon, PPS, Deputy Superintendent (Admin.) District Jail Rupnagar. It has been admitted in the above mentioned affidavit that the sentence awarded to the petitioner is for a period of 14 years and that in default of payment of fine he has to undergo imprisonment for a period of 1.5 years in addition. Vide above mentioned reply it has been reported that on 23.01.2026 a medical status report of the petitioner was obtained from Medical Officer of District Jail Rupnagar, who had reported that “it is submitted that the inmate Nachattar Singh Son of Banarsi Dass is a convict and was sentenced to 14 Years RI and had entered in District Jail Rupnagar on 17.08.2024. The inmate as on date is 75 years old. He is confined to District Jail Hospital Rupnagar, permanently. Due to his old age, he has become very weak and infirm. He is bedridden and is not oriented to time place and person. The inmate has no recollection of surroundings and is unable to go to washroom in order to urinate and defecate. He has to be supervised day in and day out. The inmate if left on his own, defecates and urinate upon himself and is unable to control the basic urge of urination and defecation. The inmate is illiterate and verbally quit. He does not make any conversation with other inmates. Due to his advancing age and high blood sugar levels he is on oral medication, which has to be given under supervision as the inmate is unable to comprehend that he is a patient of diabetes mellites. To make matters worse, the inmate has paralysis of the left half of the body. It requires at least two inmates, to make him bathe and attend other needs of the washroom. Keeping in view his current state of mind and body, he carries poor prognosis in terms of health and survival. The above mentioned information is on record.”

7. The learned State counsel has controverted the above mentioned arguments. According to learned State counsel t