ANOOP CHITKARA, J.

1. Challenging the arbitrary denial of parole by the District Magistrate concerned, the convict has come up before this Court under Article 226¹226. Power of High Courts to issue certain writs.—/227²227. Power of superintendence over all courts by the High Court.— of the Constitution of India read with Section 528³§528. Nothing in this Sanhita shall be deemed to limit or affect the inherent powers of the High Courtto make such orders as may be necessary to give effect to any order under this Sanhita, or to prevent abuse of the process of any Court or otherwise to secure the ends of justice. BNSS, 2023, seeking the issuance of a Writ in the nature of Certiorari.⁴The word certiorari comes from Law Latin, meaning "to be more fully informed." A writ of certiorari orders a lower court to deliver its record in a case so that the higher court may reviewit. The writ of certiorari is a common law writ, which may be abrogated or controlled entirely bystatute or rules of the court.

2. The petitioner was arrested in FIR No. 586, dated 20.06.2017, registered at Police Station City Jind under Sections 364, 302, 201, and 34 IPC; 3(I2)(V) of the SC/ST Act; and Section 6 of the POCSO Act.

3. Vide judgment dated 09.01.2020, the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Jind, convicted the petitioner and sentenced him to undergo imprisonment till the whole of the biological life without parole, with a fine of Rs.23,000/-.

4. According to the custody certificate dated 17.09.2026, he has been in custody for a total of 11 years, 05 months, and 13 days.

5. The petitioner had sought parole for eight weeks under the provisions of the Haryana Good Conduct Prisoner (Temporary Release) Act, 2022, on the grounds that his mother passed away long ago; his father is in custody under FIR No. 958 dated 24.06.2025; his sister is preparing for the UPSC exam, and he needs to look after her because there is no other family member to do the same.

6. Perusal of the file shows that parole was rejected principally because the sentencing order directs the convict (petitioner) to undergo imprisonment for the petitioner’s whole biological life without parole and because his temporary release was considered incompatible with the nature of that sentence and the interests of society. Additionally, the petitioner was punished for misusing the Prison Inmate Calling System [PICS] on Sep 12, 2025, by making a conference call to another undertrial prisoner.

7. The legality of that refusal must be examined in light of the governing principles concerning parole and the statutory framework applicable in Haryana, i.e, under the provisions of the Haryana Good Conduct Prisoner (Temporary Release) Act, 2022.

8. In Sunil Fulchand Shah v. Union of India and Others, [2000] 1 SCR 945; 2000-INSC-74, Feb 16, 2000; a five-judge bench of the Supreme Court holds,

[7.] ‘Parole' is a form of “temporary release” from custody, which does not suspend the sentence or the period of detention, but provides conditional release from custody and changes the mode of undergoing the sentence. In this country, there are no statutory provisions dealing with the question of grant of paroie. The Code of Criminal Procedure does not contain any provision for grant of parole. By administrative instructions, however, rules have been framed in various States, regulating the grant of parole. Thus, the action for grant of parole is generally speaking an administrative action. [962-G; E]

9. In Smt. Poonam Lata v. M.L. Wadhawan and Others, [1987] 2 SCR 1123;1987-INSC-124, Apr 22, 1987, the Supreme Court holds,

[3.] Parole is the release of a prisoner from a penal or correctional institution after he has served a part of his sentence under the continuous custody of the State and under conditions that permit his incarceration in the event of misbehaviour. It is a grant of partial liberty or lessening of restrictions to a convict prisoner and does not change the status of the prisoner.

10. In Maru Ram