SAHBIA ALIAS RAMESHWAR Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) SAHBIA @ Rameshwar has petitioned to High Court under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code read with Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India whereby he has prayed that direction to the respondents be issued to allow him parole for a period of 6 weeks under Section 3(1)(c) of the Haryana Good Conduct Prisoners (Temporary Release) Act, 1988 as he has to look after agricultural operations. It has been alleged in this petition that he was arrested in a murder case on 6.2.1990 and was tried, and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life by the Addl. Sessions Judge, Hissar on 25.2.1991. Since the day of his arrest, he has been in jail. He has undergone more then 5 years actual sentence of imprisonment and during this period of his confinement in jail, he has maintained quite an orderly behaviour. He has not committed any jail offence. His good conduct inside the jail, earned for him some remissions. His release on parole was recommended by respondent No. 2 to respondent No.1 and respondent No.1 asked for the report of the District Magistrate and for the report of the local police. District Magistrate, Hissar, after collecting information from the local police reported that the claim for parole is genuine, but, if the convict was released on parole, there would be apprehension of breach of public peace in the village. On this report of the District Magistrate, parole was refused to him. Not satisfied with that order passed by the Haryana Government, he came to the High Court and the High Court vide its order dated 10.11.1994 quashed that order of the Haryana Government and directed the respondents to reconsider the claim of the petitioner for grant of parole to the convict/petitioner within two months. Haryana Government again rejected his claim or release on parole on the same ground saying that his release on parole had not been recommended by the District Magistrate on account of apprehension of breach of public peace at his hands.

(2.) THIS plea of the petitioner has been opposed by the State of Haryana urging that the parole/furlough is a concession and no prisoner is entitled to it as a matter of right. No writ petition is maintainable and there is no infringement of any right inhereing in the petitioner. Petitioner could claim his release on parole in view of the provisions of Section 3(1)(c) of the Haryana Good Conduct Prisoners (Temporary Release) Act, 1988, but only if the District Magistrate and the Government were satisfied that the release of the petitioner was not likely to endanger the security of the State or maintenance of public order. It is the sole responsibility of the police and the District Magistrate to see that there is no danger to the security of the State or the maintenance of the public order at the hands of the life convict if he is released on parole. Section 6 was introduced in the Haryana Good Conduct Prisoners (Temporary Release) Act, 1988 so that the District Magistrate is able to be satisfied that there is no breach of peace when a prisoner is released. On merits also, his prayer for release has been opposed by the State urging that there are other brothers and the father of the convict who can look after agricultural operations and there is party faction in the village, if the convict is released of parole, it will cost heavy so far as State is concerned inasmuch as his release on parole will pose a serious hazard to the maintenance of public peace.

(3.) AGRICULTURAL operations might be looked after by someone else, but this Court has been informed that the petitioner is a familiar man and has wife and children and keeping in view that he requires to see his wife and children after long separation, I think he (convict) should be allowed parole for a few days. Convict is allowed two weeks' parole on his executing personal bond and surety bond before the District Magistrate, Hissar, If during his release on parole, he creates any law and order problem, the police would take care of and he can be called upon to furnish personal bond and surety bond in heavy amount so that it acts as a deterrent that he poses no hazard to law and order. Period of parole will commence after the personal bond and the surety bond duly attested reach the Superintendent, Central Jail, Hissar. Petition stands disposed of accordingly.