AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
6 paragraphs · 459 wordsUjagar Singh, J.
The petitioner was convicted on 24.3.1982 and was sentenced to life imprisonment by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Karnal. Since his arrest in the case, he is in custody and has undergone substantive sentence to the extent of 5 years, 10 months and 11 days and has earned remissions for 3 years, 6 months and 17 days. Thus the total sentence deemed to have been undergone by him is 9 years, 4 months and 28 days, which is quite a long period to be away from his community and brotherhood. He has sought parole for a period of 6 weeks under section 3 of the Punjab Good Conduct Prisoner (Temporary Release) Act, 1962.
The release of the petitioner is opposed on the ground that his opposite party lives in the village and tension will prevail there and there was likelihood of heinous crime.
So far as the ground for his release on parole is concerned, the Superintendent of Police, Karnal, vide his letter dated 8th December, 1987 has controverted this fact by saying that one Sukhdev Singh, who was brotherinlaw of the petitioner has been residing in the village and has been looking after the agricultural land of the petitioner. The provisions of the Act, ibid have been interpreted time and again that the convicts are not to be considered as outlaws and the society owes a duty towards them so that they may feel that they can still be welcomed in the society. These provisions have been made for the benefit of the prisoners, who have good conduct in order to enable them to mix in the brotherhood and feel that after their release they can reside in their village. Expected tension can be safeguarded by demanding a surety from the convictpetitioner to ensure that in case of any likelihood of breach of peace his bail bond and surety bond can be forfeited and the concession of parole can be withdrawn and he can be sent back to the prison.
In the circumstances of this case, the petitioner is allowed six weeks'' parole beginning from the date following the date of his release and the petitioner is directed to surrender after enjoying six weeks of parole from that date and he will surrender on the date next to the date when six week expire. The petitioner is also directed to furnish personal bond and surety bond to keep peace during this period failing which his personal bond and surety bond shall be liable to be forfeited and the petitioner will go back to the prison.
The petitioner be released on bail on his furnishing bail bond in the sum of Rs. 20,000/ to the satisfaction of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Karnal.
