HAWA SINGH Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The wife of the petitioner filed an application (Annexure P- 1) for grant of parole to the petitioner for agricultural purposes. It was submitted that the family of the petitioner was totally dependent on agriculture work. The said application for temporary release of the petitioner was recommended by the Superintendent Jail, Hisar (respondent No. 4). The recommendation was sent to the District Magistrate, Fatehabad (respondent No. 3). The District Magistrate (respondent No. 3) also recommended the release of the petitioner on parole. The said recommendation was sent to the Competent Authority i.e. the Commissioner Hisar Division, Hisar (respondent No. 2) who vide order dated 26.08.2011 (Annexure P-2) granted six weeks parole to the petitioner.

(2.) The present petition has been filed for directing respondent No. 3 i.e. District Magistrate, Fatehabad to accept the bail bonds and surety of the petitioner and release him temporarily from custody forthwith so as to enable him to carry out agricultural operations.

(3.) According to the petitioner, he has maintained good conduct in jail. There has been no complaint against him, while he remained in jail and even while availing parole; besides, he never misused the concession of parole that was given by the authorities and had always surrendered before the jail authorities well within time after the expiry of parole. The petitioner, it is stated, has availed about 13 paroles but has always surrendered before the jail authorities well within time. It is submitted that despite the warrant (Annexure P-2) issued for the release of the petitioner on parole, he is not being released. The District Magistrate, Fatehabad (respondent No. 3) has returned the bail bonds and surety bonds furnished by the petitioner on the ground that the Model Election Code of Conduct is in force and the bail bonds and surety bonds cannot be accepted during the operation of the said code. It is submitted that though the District Magistrate, Fatehabad (respondent No. 3) has been taking abundant caution not to violate the Model Code of Conduct for the guidance of the political parties and candidates issued by Election Commission of India, but there cannot be any bar to give effect to the provisions of the Haryana Good Conduct Prisioners (Temporary Release) Act, 1988 ( 'Act'-for short) and to release the petitioner on parole in terms of the provisions of the Act.