GURJIT SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Prayer in the present petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is for setting aside the impugned order dtd. 18/6/2025 (Annexure P-1) passed by respondent No.3, rejecting the parole case of the petitioner.

(2.) As per the facts of the case, the petitioner was prosecuted in a case FIR No.98, dtd. 23/7/2019 under Sec. 22(C) of the NDPS Act, 1985, registered at Police Station Tarsikka, District Amritsar and after completion of trial, the petitioner was convicted and sentenced under Sec. 22(C) of the NDPS Act for 10 years rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs.1,00,000.00 vide judgment of conviction and order of sentence dtd. 9/7/2024 passed by the learned Judge, Special Court, Amritsar. The petitioner assailed the order of his conviction and sentence by way of filing CRA-S-2683-2024, which is pending adjudication before this Court. The petitioner applied for the grant of parole for eight weeks to the respondent-authorities, which has been declined vide order dtd. 18/6/2025. Hence, aggrieved by the same, the petitioner has approached this Court by way of filing the present petition.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner applied under Sec. 3(1)d of the Punjab Good Conduct Prisoners (Temporary Release) Act, 1962 (Amendment Act, 2015) (for short, 'the Act') for eight weeks parole to meet his family members and to look after household affairs to respondent No.4 i.e. Superintendent of Police, Jail Department, Punjab. He submits that respondent No.4 had recommended the grant of eight weeks parole to the petitioner and the same was duly forwarded to respondent no.2 i.e. Director General of Police, Jail Department, Punjab and respondent No.3 i.e. District Magistrate, Amritsar. He has further submitted that case of the parole of the petitioner is governed by the provisions of the Act and as per Sec. 3(1)(d) of the Act, he is entitled to the grant of parole. It is submitted that respondent No.3 after getting police verification report from respondent No.5 i.e. Senior Superintendent of Police, Amritsar Rural, rejected the case of the petitioner for the grant of parole, vide impugned order dtd. 18/6/2025 on the ground that the prisoner can be again got involved in the business of drug after the grant of concession of parole and can be threat to state security and maintenance of public order, in case he is released. He further submits that the Panchayat of village Jabbowal has also supported the case of the petitioner for releasing him on parole vide Annexure P-2. It is submitted that out of the awarded sentence, the petitioner had already undergone actual sentence of 02 years, 10 months and 05 days as 26/7/2025 (no remission earned till date) and, thus, in view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the respondent-authorities have wrongly declined prayer of the petitioner for grant of parole on the basis of totally flimsy grounds. He further submits that the impugned order passed by the respondent-authorities is unsustainable in the eyes of law in view of the law settled and, thus, submits that the impugned order deserves to be set aside.