Gurpreet Singh vs State Of Haryana And Others

Rajiv Narain Raina, J

The petitioner has had the benefit of parole about 03 months back and he surrendered on time. The marriage of his sister is fixed for 22.11.2019. He is undergoing imprisonment for life in FIR No. 177 dated 15.05.2015 under Section 302/34 IPC and Section 25 Arms Act Police Station Farakpur, District Yamuna Nagar dated 31.07.2017.

The petitioner's father made a request to the jail authorities on 20.09.2019 with request for grant of parole to his son to celebrate the marriage of his daughter (petitioner's sister) on 22.11.2019. The timeline specified in the guidelines issued by the Haryana Government have been breached in this case as the maximum time has been exceeded by all the authorities put together i.e. Jail Superintendent, District Magistrate and Divisional Commissioner. The prayer is for emergency parole and the Haryana Government permits parole to attend the marriage of the sister as per Section 3(1)(b) of the Act. The invitation card is annexed with the petition.

Mr. Bansal sought time to file reply being the 1st day of hearing today. Since the time is short, reply may not be necessary and this petition can be disposed of as suggested by learned counsel for the petitioner, with the direction to the respondents to call for the report verifying whether the marriage is to take place or not and in case the marriage is fixed, the District Magistrate/Divisional Commissioner may pass necessary orders.

In view of the above, the petition is allowed. The petitioner is granted parole for 10 days from the date of release to the satisfaction of the District Magistrate concerned, who is further directed to impose such conditions as may be required in the Jail Manual toward the ends of securing the presence of the petitioner in jail after the period of furlough, is over and done with and the temporary release is not misused.