Ajaib Singh vs State of Punjab and others

P.K. Jain, J.

Ajaib Singh petitioner has filed this petition under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking his temporary release on parole for six weeks for agriculture purposes under section 3(c) of the Punjab Good Conduct Prisoners (Temporary Release) Act, 1962 (hereinafter called ''the Act'').

The petitioner was convicted for an offence under section 302/34, Indian Penal Code, by the Additional Sessions Judge, Sangrur, and sentenced to undergo life imprisonment and also to pay certain amount of fine by judgment dated 11.2.1994. The petitioner is undergoing the said sentence in District Jail, Sangrur. He applied for his temporary release on parole for six weeks for agriculture purposes under section 3(c) of the Act but the same has been turned down by the authorities vide letter dated 28.4.1995 on the ground that the family of late Shri Bidhi Chand who was killed by the petitioner apprehends danger from the petitioner on his release on parole.

It is not disputed by the learned State counsel that the petitioner can be released on parole for a period of six weeks for agriculture purposes as provided in Section 3(c) of the Act provided the other conditions are fulfilled. It is also not disputed that the petitioner fulfils all the necessary conditions as required under the said provision of the Act. But the request of the petitioner is being opposed on the ground that the family of the deceased apprehends danger from the petitioner if he is released on parole.

Section 6 of the Act, in this context is relevant which reads as under:

"Notwithstanding anything contained in Sections 3 and 4, no prisoner shall be entitled to be released under this Act if, on the report of the District Magistrate, the State Government or any officer authorised by it in this behalf is satisfied that his release is likely to endanger the security of the State Government or the maintenance of public order."

It is apparent from the aforesaid provision that if on the report of the District Magistrate, the State Government or any officer so authorised is satisfied that release is likely to endanger the security of the State or maintenance of the public order then such a request necessarily has to be turned down. In the present case, it is nowhere alleged by the respondents that the release of the petitioner on parole is likely to endanger the security of the State or maintenance of the public order. The only reason mentioned in the reply filed by the State is that the family of late Shri Bidhi Chand for whose murder the petitioner has been convicted and is undergoing sentence, apprehends danger from the petitioner if he is released on parole. This cannot be said to be the reason under Section 6 of the Act to deny the benefit of parole to the petitioner. The petitioner has annexed a panchnama signed by three Panches of the Nagar Panchayat of village Ranike, the lambardar and the Chowkidar thereof, whereby the release of the petitioner on parole for agriculture purposes has been recommended. It is specifically mentioned therein that his release is no danger for the maintenance of peace.

As a result of the reasons given above, this petition is allowed. Accordingly, it is directed that the petitioner be released on 6 weeks'' parole for agriculture purposes on usual terms to the satisfaction of the District Magistrate, Sangrur.