SATBIR SINGH Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER Satbir Singh, in inmate of District Jail, Karnal, was sentenced to life imprisonment on 27-2-1987 by Additional, Sessions Judge. Karnal. He applied for temporary release on parole under section 3(1)(c) of the Punjab Good Conduct Prisoners (Temporary Release) Act, 1962 for 42 days for agricultural purposes. His application was duly recommended by Jail Superintendent but the same was rejected by Director General of Prisons, Haryana, on the ground that his release would prove detrimental in the interest of peace and security. Present Criminal Writ Petition has been filed by Satbir Singh for his such release contending that he owns two acres of land in his village which has been given to him by his father, that there is no adult male member in the family who could assist in the agricultural operations over the said land and that he maintained good conduct in jail, According to him, the rejection of his case for temporary release or, parole was arbitrary, illegal and unlawful.

(2.) FROM the return filed on behalf of the respondents it is clear that conduct of the petitioner while in jail was satisfactory. It is further admitted therein that his application for parole was rejected on the ground that the district authorities had reported with regard to apprehension of breach of peace as a result thereof. This opinion, however, is not based on any material or data. No attempt has teen made to indicate as to how law and order was likely to be adversely affected by the release of the petitioner on parole. In fact so far as District Magistrate, Karnal is concerned, whose opinion alone is relevant, he does not appear to have applied his mind to the facts of the case. As is obvious from annexure R-1, he simply forwarded the report of Superintendent of Police, Karnal, to Inspector General of Prisons, Haryana, further adding that release of convict Satbir Singh S/o Sarupa on parole was not recommended, without giving any reason what so ever in support of that opinion. He has neither said that the agreed with the report of Superintendent of Police, Karnal. I, under the circumstances, find that, the denial of petitioner's prayer was on extraneous and arbitrary grounds and so was not it all justified.