High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCRWP/960/2017dismissed

Ranjit Singh v. State Of Punjab & Others

2017-08-24Mr. Justice Harinder Singh Sidhu2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH CRWP No.960 of 2017 (O&M) Date of Decision: August 24, 2017 Ranjit Singh

...Petitioner

VERSUS

State of Punjab and others

...Respondents

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE INDERJIT SINGH

Present:

Mr.Rishu Mahajan, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr.Gaurav Garg Dhuriwala, Sr.DAG, Punjab for the respondent-State.

**** INDERJIT SINGH, J.

The petitioner has filed this criminal writ petition under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India for issuance of an appropriate writ, order or direction for grant of emergency parole for 05days to enable the petitioner to attend the marriage of his younger brother. Notice of motion was issued and learned State counsel appeared and contested the petition.

I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned State counsel and have gone through the record. From the record, I find that the present petition has been filed on17.08.2017 and first time, it was listed before this Court on 22.08.2017. It is stated by learned counsel for the petitioner that marriage of younger Vineet Gulati 2017.08.29 16:21 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

CRWP No.960 of 2017 -2brother of the petitioner is to be solemnized on 25.08.2017. Learned State counsel requested for short adjournment to verify whether marriage of younger brother of the petitioner is to take place and further, for filing reply. If the case is adjourned, then it would become infructuous as the marriage is stated to be solemnized on 25.08.2017.

First of all, I find that this fact would have been in the knowledge of the petitioner since long that marriage of his younger brother is to be solemnized on 25.08.2017 but he did not apply to the Superintendent Jail for emergency parole nor he filed the present petition within a reasonable time and no ground is mentioned as to why the petitioner has not applied to the competent authority for emergency parole. Secondly, I find that the marriage is of younger brother of the petitioner, where the presence of the petitioner is not necessary. Therefore, finding no merit in the present petition, the same is dismissed.

August 24, 2017 (INDERJIT SINGH) Vgulati JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Yes Whether reportable No Vineet Gulati 2017.08.29 16:21 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh