Gurvail Singh v. Director General Of Police Jail Dept. Punjab Chd And Others

CWP No.13461 of 2018 (O&M) [ 1 ] *****

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH CWP No.13461 of 2018 (O&M) Date of decision:October 15, 2018 Gurvail Singh

...Petitioner

Versus

Director General of Police and others

...Respondents

Coram:

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rakesh Kumar Jain

Present:

Ms. Bhupinder Pal Kaur Brar, Advocate, for the petitioner.

Mr. Sahil Sharma, DAG, Punjab.

**** Rakesh Kumar Jain, J.

The petitioner is aggrieved against the order dated 04.05.2018 by which application filed by him under Section 3(1)(d) of the Punjab Good Conduct Prisoners (Temporary Release) Act, 1962 for his release on parole for six weeks to meet his family members has been declined. In brief, the petitioner is undergoing life sentence in the Central Jail, Amritsar for committed murder.

The respondents have filed their reply in which it is averred that it has been found in the inquiry that Jiwan Singh, father of the petitioner, has stated that he is hale and hearty and wife of the petitioner is living at her paternal home. His father has also stated that the petitioner is a quarrelsome person and may not return in jail in case of his release on parole. It has also come on record that the petitioner is not within the control of his family. In view thereof, the District Magistrate has passed the order of rejection. VINOD KUMAR 2018.10.16 15:55 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document phhc

CWP No.13461 of 2018 (O&M) [ 2 ] ***** Counsel for the petitioner, however, has submitted that the petitioner has agricultural land and his family members do not want the petitioner to be released on parole as they wanted to usurp his land. After hearing counsel for the parties and examining the available record, I am of the considered opinion that the petitioner does not deserve the concession of parole for the purpose for which he has applied because his family members do not want to meet him and they have specifically given the reasons that the petitioner is a quarrelsome person and may not return after the expiry of parole. Moreover, wife of the petitioner is also living with her parents.

Consequently, the present petition is hereby dismissed being denuded of any merit, though without any order as to costs. October 15, 2018 (Rakesh Kumar Jain) vinod* Judge Whether speaking / reasoned:

Yes/No Whether Reportable:

Yes/No VINOD KUMAR 2018.10.16 15:55 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document phhc