SATYAVART Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner Satyavarat, who is undergoing life imprisonment as a result of his conviction by the Addl. Sessions Judge, Bhiwani in Sessions Trial No. 38 of 1994 and whose appeal No. 621 of 1996 is pending before this Court, has filed this miscellaneous petition for directing the respondents to release him on parole under Section 3(1)(b) of the Haryana Good Conduct Prisoners (Temporary Release) Act, 1988. The ground on which the petitioner has sought his release on parole is the marriage of Shri Sandeep, who happens to be his real sister's son. The respondents have not contested the assertion made by the petitioner regarding the marriage of his sister's son but they have pleaded that the petitioner has already availed two weeks parole from 7.4.1997 to 22.4.1997 in connection with Bhat ceremony and in view of the note given below Section 3(2)(c) the petitioner is not entitled to the benefit of parole.

(2.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner relied on Satbir v. State of Haryana, 1996(2) RCR 47 and argued that in the absence of any restriction in the Act, the number of times during which benefit of parole can be extended to the prisoner, the note appended below Section 3(2)(c) cannot be used as a tool to deny the benefit which is otherwise available to the petitioner. The learned Deputy Advocate General fairly conceded that the provisions contained in the Act of 1988 do not contain any restriction except the one regarding the total period during which a prisoner can be released on parole under Section 3(1)(b) of the Act.

(3.) A bare reading of the provisions reproduced above shows that the total length of time during which benefit of parole can be availed under Section 3(2)(b) is 4 weeks. Other than this, there is no condition for grant of parole to a prisoner under Section 3(1)(b). In view of this, the executive instructions issued by the department against the grant of parole on more than one occasion for the purposes specified in Section 3(1)(b) cannot be made a ground to deny the benefit of parole to the petitioner on the ground that he has already availed this benefit from 7.4.1997 to 22.4.1997.