DEEPAK @ DEEPA Vs. STATE OF HARYANA AND ANOTHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard counsel for the parties.

(2.) The petitioner has been convicted in case FIR No.272 dated 28.7.2009 registered at Police Station Butana District Karnal for the offences under Sections 398 and 402 Indian Penal Code. He has been sentenced to undergo imprisonment for 7 years. The order of conviction and sentence was passed on 14.8.2010. The petitioner is undergoing his sentence in District Jail Karnal. The parents of the petitioner had died and his wife had a pregnancy of 34 weeks. There is no other member in the family to look after the wife of the petitioner. The petitioner applied for parole before the Superintendent, District Jail, Karnal but according to the petitioner, he refused to entertain the parole application on the ground that the petitioner had not completed one year of his sentence after conviction.

(3.) Notice of motion was issued in the case and the reply has been filed by Sh. Jagjit Singh, Superintendent, District Jail, Karnal on behalf of respondents. It is submitted that the Haryana Good Conduct Prisoners (Temporary Release) Act, 1988 ("Act: - for short) has been enacted to provide for temporary release to the prisoners on good conduct on certain conditions. However, the prisoners cannot claim it as a matter of right as this is only a concession given to them for good conduct and on certain conditions provided in the Act.