Mere Registration Of Cases Against Convict Not Sufficient To Deny Parole, Cogent Material Must: Punjab & Haryana High Court

The Punjab and Haryana High Court has said that mere registration of various cases against a convict is not a sufficient ground to deny parole and there must be "cogent material" to refuse relief.Justice Lisa Gill and Justice Amarjot Bhatti noted that in the present case, parole was rejected by the District Magistrate because according to the report furnished by Senior Superintendent of Police, in case petitioner is released on temporary parole, he can indulge in smuggling of narcotics and he may also abscond during parole.The Court opined that mere apprehension is not a valid ground for rejection of application filed by petitioner seeking parole."Consideration of the question whether release of petitioner on parole is likely to endanger security of State or maintenance of public order has clearly not been carried out by the competent authority. Cogent material to indicate the same rather than mere registration of various cases has to be available," said the division bench.The Court was hearing a petition filed by Kulwinder Singh alias Taina seeking quashing of an order passed by District Magistrate, Ferozepur, being illegal, vague, unreasonable and arbitrary with further prayer to issue directions to respondents to release petitioner for eight weeks parole to enable him to meet and look-after his family members and to settle household affairs in accordance with provisions of Section 3(1)(d) of the Punjab Good Conduct Prisoners (Temporary Release) Act, 1962.Singh was convicted and sentenced under Section 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (NDPS Act) to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 11 years and to pay fine of Rs. 1,50,000.The State counsel submitted that Apart from present case, petitioner is convicted under two other FIRs registered under the provisions of NDPS Act."Petitioner is facing trial in the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Faridkot in FIR No. 332 dated 16.10.2021 under Section 42, 52- A of the Prisons Act, Police Station City Faridkot as one mobile phone was recovered from his possession while he was confined in prison. The application filed by petitioner was rejected as he could indulge in selling narcotic drugs or he could abscond during his parole," he added.After hearing the submissions, the Court said that, "objectives of parole are twofold i.e. rehabilitation of offender and protection of society. The main purpose of parole is that prisoner can maintain continuity together with his family, friends and community and at the same time to save prisoner from harmful effects of continuous prisoner life. Parole enables a prisoner to develop a feeling of self confidence that there is a life beyond prison."It helps prisoner to develop a sense of hope and active interest in his life with a view to rehabilitate the prisoner. Competent authority can always impose sufficient and necessary conditions while granting parole, it added.Reliance was placed on Bansi Lal versus State of Punjab & Others”, 2016(4) R.C.R. (Criminal) 1017, where it was observed :"During incarceration of a prisoner in jail after his conviction he is entitled for temporary release on parole which though is a concession and not a right. However, in order to reform a prisoner a periodic temporary release on parole for short duration is necessary. This is a welfare measure in the interest of a prisoner..."The bench opined that mere apprehension of Magistrate is not a valid ground to deny parole.In the light of the above, the Court set aside the order and directed the "District Magistrate, Ferozepur to reconsider the application filed by petitioner seeking parole in the light of aforesaid provisions of the Punjab Good Conduct Prisoners (Temporary Release) Act, 1962 and discussion as above, within a period of four weeks of receipt of certified copy of the order."Mr. Navjot Singh, Advocate for the petitioner.Mr. H.S. Deol, Senior DAG, Punjab.Kulwinder Singh alias Taina v. State of Punjab and others2024 LiveLaw (PH) 197Click here to read/download the order

Mere Registration Of Cases Against Convict Not Sufficient To Deny Parole, Cogent Material Must: Punjab & Haryana High Court

Aiman J. Chishti

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Aiman J. Chishti

Mere Registration Of Cases Against Convict Not Sufficient To Deny Parole, Cogent Material Must: Punjab & Haryana High Court

Aiman J. Chishti

This is a premium content Available exclusively to Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Aiman J. Chishti

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers