SUSHIL KUMAR Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) SUSHIL Kumar was sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life in case FIR No.39 dated 2.3.1991 under sections 302/324/321/34 of the Indian Penal Code, P.S. Indri and convicted on 9/10.7.1993. He has now petitioned to this Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure read with Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India for his release on parole for a period of 6 weeks as he is to attend agricultural operations. His prayer for the release on parole was earlier rejected by the Government on the ground of apprehension of breach of peace at his hands if he was released on parole. It has been alleged in this petition that the release of the convict prisoner on parole was refused to him on the ground which was totally untenable. Panchayat had certified that if he was released on parole, there would be no breach of peace at his hands and further there was no one who could look after agricultural operations in his absence as his parents are old. His one brother is minor and another Advocate. This prayer has been opposed by the State urging that the concession of parole was refused to him on the ground that the petitioner has two more brothers and his brother Rajesh who is an advocate can look after agricultural operations. The petitioner who is undergoing sentence of imprisonment for life under the warrant issued by the Court of Law, cannot be expected to look after the cultivation. The petitioner is a Graduate and is undergoing life imprisonment. He cannot be expected to look after the agricultural operations relating to his land. It has been further urged that the parole case of the petitioner is still in the process of verification by District Magistrate, Karnal and the decision would be taken whether can be allowed parole or not on the receipt of the report of the District Magistrate. It is not a case where this Court should invoke its extraordinary writ jurisdiction. It has been brought to my notice by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the case of the convict -prisoner was rejected by the Addl. Director General of Prisons, Haryana vide No. 12267/GI/G -5/R -9 -2 - S -1004 dated 17.5.1995 on the basis of the report of the District Magistrate, Karnal which was to the effect that there would be apprehension of breach of peace at the hands of the petitioner in case he was released on parole.

(2.) SECTION 3(l)(c) of the Haryana Good Conduct Prisoners (Temporary Release) Act, 1988 permits temporary release of the prisoner if necessary for ploughing, sowing or harvesting or carrying on any other agricultural operation on his land or his father's undivided land actually in possession of the prisoner.

(3.) UNDER Section 3(1) of the said Act, the State Government can in consultation with the District Magistrate of any other officer appointed in this behalf, subject to such conditions and in such manner as may be prescribed under temporary release of the prisoner for a period specified in sub -section 2 of Section 3 of the said Act.