BALBIR SINGH Vs. HARYANA STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE application made by the petitioner for being released on parole has been rejected on the ground that the house of the petitioner does not require repairs. The learned counsel for the petitioner has relied on a judgment of this Court in Cr. Misc. No. 34879-M of 1999 (Satbir v. The State of Haryana and others) decided on 21st February, 2000, where such ground has not been accepted by this Court and parole has been granted. In that case, it has been observed that it is for the petitioner to decide whether the house should be repaired or not. Thus the petitioner cannot be denied parole on this ground. The second reason given for rejecting the parole to the petitioner is that the release of the petitioner would result in breach of the peace. The learned counsel for the petitioner has relied on a judgment of this Court in Chand Singh v. State of Punjab, 1996(3) RCR 230. In the aforesaid judgment in paragraph 4 it has been observed as follows :

(2.) THE learned counsel has also relied on a judgment of this Court in Ajmer Singh v. State of Punjab, 1996(3) RCR 716. In this case also the petitioner was granted parole by rejecting similar ground as put forward by the State.