DHARAM SINGH ALIAS DHARAMBIR Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a Crl. Misc. 25162/M of 1997 filed by Dharam Singh alias Dharambir under Section 482 Cr.P.C. read with Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India whereby he has prayed that he be granted furlough under Section 4(1) (a) of the Haryana Good Conduct Prisons (Temporary Release) Act, 1988 (in short the Act) for agricultural purposes. It has been averred by him that in case FIR No.65 dated 26.1.94 under Section 302/34 IPC of PS Bahadurgarh he alongwith others was arrested. He has been in jail since the date of arrest. He has remained in jail for a period of 1 year, 10 months and 26 days from 4.3.94 to 31.1.1996 as an under -trial. He has been in jail after conviction from 31.1.96 onwards. Till 10. 11.97 i.e. when this Crl. Misc. Petition was filed, he had remained in jail for a period of 1 year 9 months 10 days after conviction. He has remained in jail for a total period of 3 years, 8 months and 6 days. He has thus remained in jail for a period of more than 3 years and a half. He requested the jail authorities for the grant of furlough to him for a period of 3 weeks for agricultural purposes. On 25.10.1997, the gram panchayat of village Asoda Todran recommended his case for release on furlough for agricultural purposes. Gram Panchayat also certified that in case he was allowed furlough, there will be no apprehension of breach of peace at his hands. It was also certified that on earlier occasions, when he was released on parole, he surrendered in time after the expiry of period of parole. Resolution of the gram panchayat is Annexure P1 in this behalf. His conduct has been throughout satisfactory in jail. He committed no offence in jail. He maintained orderly behaviour outside jail when he was on parole. His case of all squarely within the meaning of Section 4(1) (a) of the Act for his release on furlough.

(2.) THE respondents -State of Haryana contested this petition urging that the petitioner has not earned 3 annual good conduct remissions so far and as such he is not eligible for temporary release on furlough in view of the provisions of clause (e) (b) of Section 4 of the Act. He never submitted any application for consideration of the grant of furlough to him because he was not entitled to furlough. He has earned only one annual good conduct remission whereas for qualifying for release on furlough he should earn 3 annual good conduct remissions.

(3.) I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Assistant Advocate General for the State of Haryana and have gone through the record.