JAI SINGH Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner who is undergoing life imprisonment in respect of offences under Sections 302 and 307/34 of the Indian Penal Code, and for possessing unauthorised arms under the Terrorist & Disruptive Activities Prevention) Act has sought his release on parole. It was pleaded that agriculture is the only source of livelihood of petitioner's family and the petitioner used to cultivate the land in village Kardhan. It was further pleaded that there was none else in his family to look after agricultural land, and for this reason he may be released on parole. The Panchayat had also recommended for his release on parole vide resolution (copy Annexure P).

(2.) THE respondents including the State of Haryana have opposed the request for grant of parole, as the district authorities did not recommend parole, and request for this purpose was rejected by the competent authority. It was also pleaded that the petitioner's father and brother, who were acquitted, could do agriculture work.

(3.) IT is doubtful that the petitioner's brother and father would render help in agricultural operations concerning the land failing to the share of the petitioner.