MANJEET SINGH Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) MANJIT Singh convict was granted four weeks parole for agricultural purposes by the requisite authority under section 3(1)(c) and 3(2)(c) of the Punjab Good Conduct Prisoners (Temporary Release) Act, 1962, as applicable to the State of Haryana, although the above referred provisions provide for grant of six weeks parole for this purpose. He has invoked the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuing a writ in the nature of habeas corpus for extension of this parole by two weeks in order to enable him to do the agricultural work. The petitioner further alleges that two weeks parole already availed of by him in the year 1986 was special emergency parole granted by the Government byway of flood relief.

(2.) IN the return filed by the State it is averred that the petitioner had already availed of two weeks parole in the year 1988 and thus he was entitled to four weeks parole only. However, it is not controverted that the above referred two weeks parole was a special concession granted by the State Government in order to meet the situation created by floods.

(3.) A perusal of this provision leaves no room for doubt that for agricultural purposes, the period of such parole would not exceed six weeks, which in turn, implied that the Government has discretion to curtail this period to even less than six weeks. Learned counsel for the petitioner pointed out instructions by the Punjab Government to the effect that for agricultural purposes the parole should not be recommended for less than six weeks. These instructions were issued to the concerned jail authorities. The instructions would not amount to diluting the effect of statute wherein discretion is left to the requisite authorities regarding the minimum period of parole for agricultural purposes. The petitioner has not alleged that this period was curtailed for some mala fide reasons or due to some motivation.