BHUPINDER SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Present petition has been filed for quashing/setting aside the order dtd. 27/9/2018 (Annexure P-2) passed by the Superintendent, District Jail, Sangrur, whereby the application of the petitioner for grant of parole for house repair has been declined. The petitioner has been convicted under Sec. 22 of the NDPS Act vide judgment and order dtd. 13/3/2018 of the Special Judge, Sangrur. He has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten years and to pay a fine of Rs.1,00,000.00. He submitted an application to Superintendent District Jail, Sangrur on 21/9/2018 for grant of parole for six weeks. The application has been rejected vide order dtd. 27/9/2018. It has been stated that the petitioner was shifted to Central Jail, Bathinda from District Jail, Sangrur on 11/11/2018. He had quarreled with fellow inmates. Thereby he had committed a jail offence for which he was awarded punishment of confining him in a separate barrack from other inmates for one month. The said punishment had been judicially appraised by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sangrur vide order dtd. 17/8/2018. Therefore as per orders of the Addl. Director General of Police (Prisons) Punjab dtd. 17/4/2002 he is not entitled to parole for one year i.e., upto 23/5/2019.

(2.) The petitioner has filed CM No.4311 of 2019 stating that during the pendency of this petition, his father Ram Singh fell seriously ill. An urgent bypass surgery was conducted on 12/2/2019 at Ivy Hospital, Mohali. After the bypass surgery his father needs regular check up and an attendant to look after him. The petitioner is the only son and he be released on parole to attend to this ailing father. Sh. Karanbir Singh AAG Punjab has placed on record a report from the SHO P.S. City-I Malerkotla. It has been stated that the father of the petitioner was operated on 15/2/2019. He was discharged on 19/2/2019. He is now staying in his house. He has not fully recovered and keeps lying on the bed. There is no male member in the family who can look after his father. The only ground to deny parole to the petitioner vide the impugned order is that he had committed a Jail offence and consequently he cannot be released on parole for a period of one year as per the orders of the Addl. Director General of Police, Prisons Punjab dtd. 17/4/2002. A somewhat similar question was considered by a Division Bench of this Court in Gurpreet Singh v. State of Punjab 2012 (3) R.C.R.(Criminal) 504. In that case the petitioner had sought emergency parole as his mother was unwell and had to undergo surgery. Parole was denied on the ground that as per sub-rule (2) of Rule 3 of the Punjab Good Conduct Prisoners (Temporary Release) Rules 1963 a prisoner could not be released unless he has after his conviction maintained good conduct for at least four months.

(3.) This Court allowed parole holding as under: