PAHLAD Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY this petition filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the prayer made is that the petitioners who are owners of a large tract of agricultural land, should be released on parole for the purpose of carrying on their agricultural operations in the ensuing season. The petitioners applied to the authorities for release on parole but as the authorities have taken their time over rendering a decision on the representation they have filed the present petition.

(2.) NOTICE was issued to the Advocate General, Haryana, on 10th April, 1996 and a reply has also been filed in response to the notice. In the reply, the stand taken is that in view of the Haryana Government Standing Instructions dated 1st September, 1989 (Annexure R -1), parole could not be granted to the petitioners as they had not completed one year's actual sentence after conviction which had been recorded on 22nd December, 1995.

(3.) MR . Majithia has urged that on a comparative reading of Sections 3 and 4 of the Haryana Good Conduct Prisoners (Temporary Release) Act, 1988 (hereinafter called 'the Act'), it would be evident that while Section 3 which relates to the release of a prisoner on parole, does not envisage any minimum period of sentence after conviction before a prisoner can be released thereunder, Section 4 which deals with temporary release on furlough, specifically provides that before release under that section, the prisoner must undergo continuous imprisonment for a period of three years -inclusive of the pre -sentence detention, if any, and as Section 3 did not envisage any minimum sentence, the instruction Annexure R -1 being beyond the scope of the section, could not stand scrutiny.