MUKESH KUMAR Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present criminal writ petition has been preferred under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India read with Sec. 3 of Haryana Good Conduct Prisoners (Temporary Release) Act, 2022 seeking quashing of particulars dtd. 31/1/2025 issued by Divisional Commissioner, Division Karnal, District Karnal whereby petitioner has been granted the temporary release on parole for a duration of 10 weeks on the condition of him suffering two surety bonds of a sum of Rs.2,00,000.00 each.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner, inter alia, submits that the petitioner belongs to a Scheduled Caste community, and is a Below Poverty Line (BPL) individual with no surviving parents or spouse. In fact, he has a minor daughter, who is presently studying in 11th standard. Further, the petitioner possesses no substantial immovable property, except for a small ancestral house in his village. In light of this situation, he is unable to arrange for sureties to fulfil the condition imposed for his release on parole. Therefore, he may be allowed to furnish personal bonds of a lower amount, i.e., Rs.20,000.00 each instead of two surety bonds, each in the sum of Rs.2,00,000.00. Reliance in this regard is placed on the judgments rendered in State of Haryana vs. Jagdish, 2010(3) JT-341; Sunil Batra vs. Delhi Administration, (1978) SC 1675; Maneka Gandhi vs. Union of India and Another(1978)1 SCC 248; Charles Sobraj vs. Superintendent Central Jail, Tihar, New Delhi (1978) 4 SCC 104 and Mahidul Sheikh vs. State of Haryana (2022) 2 RCR (Criminal)26.

(3.) Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and upon perusal of the records with his able assistance, it is apparent that the petitioner has been awarded Warrant of Temporary Release dtd. 31/1/2025 (Annexure P-2) for 10 weeks in view of his good conduct by Divisional Commissioner, Division Karnal, District Karnal. Furthermore, the petitioner has no surviving immediate family that could assist him in the present situation.