← Library
High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCRWP/1057/2017disposed of

Sohan Singh v. State Of Punjab And ORS.

2017-09-14Mr. Justice Krishna Murari,Mr. Justice Jaspal Singh2 pages

CRWP-1057-2017

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

CRWP-1057-2017.

Decided on: September 14, 2017.

Sohan Singh .. Petitioner

VERSUS

State of Punjab and others .. Respondents * * *

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.M.S.BEDI HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH * * * PRESENT Kanwar Satbir Singh, Advocate, for the petitioner.

M.M.S. BEDI, J. (ORAL) Petitioner, through the instant petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeks concession of parole under the Punjab Good Conduct Prisoners (Temporary Release) Act, 1962, in order to enable him to get his wife treated as she is allegedly suffering from appendicular lump as per the OPD slip, Annexure P3, attached with the petition. In para 4 of the petition, it is mentioned that the Jail Raj Kumar Arora 2017.09.19 12:12 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CRWP-1057-2017 Superintendent, Patiala, refused to accept the application of the petitioner. In view of the circumstances that the case of the petitioner has not been considered on the basis of his request by any of the competent authority, we deem it appropriate to dispose of this petition in limine.

Notice of motion to the Advocate General, Punjab. On asking of the Court, notice has been accepted by Mr.Sidakmeet Sandhu, Asstt. A.G. Punjab, present in the Court. Three sets of paper book be supplied to the State counsel during the course of the day.

This petition is disposed of, at this stage, with a direction that the Jail Superintendent, Patiala, will permit the petitioner to submit application and forward the same in accordance with law for due consideration by the competent authority within a period of one week and communicate the decision of the authorities on the same within 7 days of receipt of the same from the competent authority. In case no application is filed by the petitioner, the present petition may be treated as his application for parole for consideration in accordance with law. (M.M.S. BEDI) JUDGE September 14, 2017.

(AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH) raj arora JUDGE Whether speaking / reasoned Yes / No Whether reportable Yes / No Raj Kumar Arora 2017.09.19 12:12 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document