LAWS(P&H)-2015-8-505

RANJIT YADAV Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS

Decided On August 11, 2015
Ranjit Yadav Appellant
V/S
STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner-Ranjit Yadav, who stands convicted under Section 302 IPC in case FIR No.225 dated 1.12.2011, Police Station City, Sunam and presently confined in District Jail, Sangrur has filed the present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution read with Section 3(1)(d) and 2-A of the Punjab Good Conduct Prisoners (Temporary Release) Act, 1988 with a prayer to release him on parole for four weeks so as to enable him to meet his family members and take care of them.

(2.) The case of the petitioner is that against his conviction and sentence, he has already filed an appeal which is lying admitted for final adjudication. He has already undergone a period of about four years of actual sentence. He applied for release on parole for four weeks by submitting necessary application before the Jail Superintendent. Alongwith the application, Panchayatnama was also appended. The jail authorities forwarded his case to the District Magistrate, Aarariya, Bihar but the District Magistrate rejected his parole case on 17.11.2014 on the ground that the Superintendent of Police, Aarariya had not recommended his parole case as he is a young boy and could indulge in wrongful activity, if released on parole.

(3.) On the last date of hearing, when the Court was informed that the revised report of the District Magistrate, Aarariya was still awaited, the hearing was adjourned for today and the State directed to take necessary steps for sending reminder to the District Magistrate, Aarariya for submitting the revised report. Pursuant to the same, reply by way of short affidavit of Superintendent, District Jail, Sangrur has been filed wherein it is mentioned that in view of the directions on the last date of hearing, the Jail Superintendent sent reminders to the District Magistrate, Aarariya. Ultimately, the District Magistrate, Aarariya sent the specific report whereby the parole case of the petitioner has not been recommended. Copy of the letter received from the District Magistrate, Aarariya has been appended with the short affidavit as Annexure R-1. The relevant portion of the same is reproduced here-in-below :-