Dalwinder Singh vs Inspector General of Prisons

J.S. Sekhon, J.

The petitioner is undergoing sentence of imprisonment for life in a murder case under the orders dated June 12, 1990 of the learned Sessions Judge, Hoshiarpur. His conduct in the jail has been good throughout. He applied for parole on account of repairing his house which was damaged due to heavy rains. His case was commended by the Superintendent, Central Jail, Jalandhar for four weeks'' parole to the concerned authorities on 6th August, 1991 but the concerned authority had rejected it on 27th November, 1991 on the report of the local police. In this petition, the petitioner contends that the said concession has been withheld on the vague report of the local police.

In the return filed by Shri Daulat Singh, Chief Welfare Officer on behalf of the respondents, in para No. 2, the gist of the report has been given as under :

"As per report of Incharge Officer, P.S. Bhogpur, the complainant party apprehends danger from the convict and because of party faction, there is danger of loss to both sides. Apart from above, there is no need of any repair to the house of prisoner Dalvinder Singh. So officer incharge, P.S. Bhogpur and Deputy Superintendent of Police do not recomended release on parole to prisoner Dalvinder Singh. I also do not recommended release on parole to prisoner Dalvinder Singh son of Malkiat Singh.

Sd/

Senior Superintendent of Police,

Jalandhar."

I have heard the learned Counsel for the parties, besides perusing the record.

The perusal of the above referred reported reveals that the case of parole was not recommended due to party faction and on account of the fact that the house of the petitioner does not require any repair. The petitioner had appended the panchayatnama dated 7th December, 1990 executed by Gurcharan Singh Sarpanch and five members of the Panchayat of his village to the effect that the house of the petitioner is damaged to a great extent due to the rains and there is no other able male member in the family to get the repairs effected. It is further mentioned that the Gram Panchayat owners the responsibility that the petitioner will maintain law and order during his such release. Strangely enough, in the said report of local police, the details of the condition of house of the prisoner do not figure.

Under these circumstances, there is considerable force in the contention of the learned Counsel for the petitioner that the concession of parole has been with held on vague grounds.

Moreover, Legislature has enacted Punjab Good Conduct Prisoners (Temporary Release) Act, 1962 in order to encourage the prisoners to become good citizens by behaving properly in the jail as well as on humanitarian grounds so that the departments may not suffer unnecessarily.

Under these circumstances, it appears that the respondents had withheld the concession of parole arbitrarily on vague grounds.

Consequently, by accepting this petition, the petitioner is directed to be released on four weeks'' parole for repairing his house from the date he furnishes the requisite bonds to the satisfaction of District Magistrate, Jalandhar undertaking to keep peace, be of good behaviour during this period and to surrender before the concerned authority after expiry of this period.

The petition stands disposed of accordingly.