Haryana Parole: 10-Week Entitlement Must Be Availed in Two Parts, No Automatic Extension Without Substantial Proof, Rules Punjab & Haryana HC (Sec 3(2) Haryana Good Conduct Prisoners Act, 2022) - 2025-04-08

Legal Awareness & Information.

Parole Extension Denied: Punjab & Haryana High Court Clarifies "Two Parts" Rule for Availing 10-Week Parole

Court: High Court of Punjab and Haryana Bench: Justice Manisha Batra Case: Amandeep Singh vs. State of Haryana (CRWP 3297 / 2025) Date of Order: May 09, 2025

Chandigarh: The High Court of Punjab and Haryana, in a recent judgment, dismissed a plea for parole extension, underscoring that the 10-week parole entitlement for convicts under the Haryana Good Conduct Prisoners (Temporary Release) Act, 2022, must be availed in two distinct parts. The court also highlighted the necessity of substantial medical evidence when seeking parole or its extension on grounds of a family member's illness.

Case Background

Amandeep Singh, the petitioner, is currently serving a ten-year sentence at Central Jail-I, Hisar, following his conviction under Section 21 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act, 1985, and various sections of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) in a case (FIR No. 90) registered in 2011.

He was granted parole for six weeks and released on April 1, 2025, with a scheduled surrender date of May 9, 2025. The petitioner sought an extension of his parole by four weeks, citing the ill health of his 65-year-old mother. He claimed she suffers from multiple age-related ailments and diabetic wounds, requiring his personal care. The petition was filed under Article 226 of the Constitution, read with Sections 3(1) and 4(1) of the Haryana Good Conduct Prisoners (Temporary Release) Act, 2022.

Arguments Presented

The petitioner's counsel argued that under Section 3(1) of the 2022 Act, a convict is entitled to ten weeks of parole in a calendar year. Having availed only six weeks, the petitioner contended he was still eligible for the remaining four weeks. An application for extension had reportedly been submitted to the Jail Superintendent on May 6, 2025, but no decision had been made.

Opposing the plea, the Learned Assistant Advocate General for Haryana argued that the petitioner was granted parole until May 9, 2025. Citing Section 3(2) of the Act, the state contended that the ten-week parole period must be availed in two parts and not in a single stretch or through continuous extensions beyond what might constitute one part. Thus, the petitioner was not entitled to an extension of the current parole period.

Court's Analysis and Reasoning

Justice Manisha Batra , after hearing counsel for both parties and perusing the records, noted the petitioner's claim regarding his mother's health. The judgment observed: > "Although the petitioner has placed on record some photographs of his mother showing that she is having some wounds but no medical records has been placed on record to show that she is seriously ill."

The court then focused on the statutory provision governing parole: > "As per Section 3(1) of the Act, 2022, the petitioner is entitled for ten weeks parole in a year. However, as per Section 3(2) of the Act, 2022, a convict can be released on parole for ten weeks in a calendar year but the convict has to avail the same in two parts."

The court found that considering these facts, particularly the lack of substantial medical evidence and the specific mandate of Section 3(2) regarding availing parole in two parts, the petitioner's current parole did not warrant an extension.

Final Decision and Implications

The High Court dismissed the petition for parole extension. However, recognizing that the petitioner was due to surrender on the day of the judgment (May 9, 2025) and could not do so due to the petition's pendency, the court granted him three days from the date of the order to surrender to the jail authorities.

Crucially, the court stated: > "He will be at liberty to move appropriate application for grant of parole before the authorities concerned on being entitled for the same."

This implies that the petitioner can apply for the remaining portion of his annual parole entitlement later, in compliance with the "two parts" rule stipulated by the Haryana Good Conduct Prisoners (Temporary Release) Act, 2022. The judgment reinforces the specific conditions under which parole can be availed and extended under the new Haryana Act, emphasizing adherence to statutory provisions and the requirement for adequate proof for claims made on humanitarian grounds.