Kirpal Singh vs State of Haryana

G.S. Singhvi, J.

The petitionerKirpal Singh, who is undergoing life imprisonment as a result of his conviction by the Addl. Sessions Judge, Bhiwani in Sessions Trial No. 38 of 1994 and whose appeal No. 621 of 1996 is pending before this Court, has filed this miscellaneous petition for directing the respondents to release him on parole under Section 3(1)(b) of the Haryana Good Conduct Prisoners (Temporary Release) Act, 1988. The ground on which the petitioner has sought his release on parole is the marriage of Shri Sandeep, who happens to be his real sister''s son. The respondents have not contested the assertion made by the petitioner regarding the marriage of his sister''s son but they have pleaded that the petitioner has already availed two weeks parole from 7.4.1997 to 22.4.1997 in connection with Bhat Ceremony and in view of the note given below Section 3(2)(c), the petitioner is not entitled to the benefit of parole.

Learned counsel for the petitioner relied on Satbir v. State of Haryana, 1996(2) Recent Criminal Reports 47 and argued that in the absence of any restriction in the Act on the number of times during which benefit of parole can be extended to the prisoner, the note appended below Section 3(2)(c) cannot be used as a tool to deny the benefit which is already available to the petitioner. The learned Deputy AdvocateGeneral fairly conceded that the provisions contained in the Act of 1988 do not contain any restriction except the one regarding the total period during which a prisoner can be released on parole under Section 3(1)(b) of the Act.

After having considered the rival submissions, I find merit in the argument of the learned counsel for the petitioner that her client is entitled to be released on parole in view of the impending marriage of his real sister''s son. Section 3(1)(b) and Section 3(2)(b) and 3(2)(c) are quoted below for the purpose of reference :

"3. Temporary release of prisoners on certain grounds :

(1) The State Government may, in consultation with the District Magistrate or any other officer appointed in this behalf, by notification in the Official Gazette and subject to such conditions and in such manner as may be prescribed, release temporarily for a period specified in subsection (2); any prisoner, if the State Government is satisfied that

(a) xx xx xx

(b) the marriage of prisoner himself, his son, daughter, grandson, granddaughter, brother, sister, sister''s son or daughter is to be celebrated."

(2) The period for which a prisoner may be released shall be determined by the State Government so as not to exceed

(a) xx xx xx

(b) where the prisoner is to be released on the ground specified in clause (b) or clause (d) or subsection (1), four weeks; and

(c) where the prisoner is to be released on the grounds specified in clause (c) of subsection (1), six weeks;

Provided that the temporary release under clause (c) can be availed more than once during the year which shall not, however, cumulatively exceed six weeks".

A bare reading of the provisions reproduced above shows that the total length of time during which benefit of parole can be availed under Section 3(2)(b) is 4 weeks. Other than this, there is no condition for grant of parole to a prisoner under Section 3(1)(b). In view of this, the executive instructions issued by the department against the grant of parole on more than one occasion for the purpose specified in Section 3(1)(b) cannot be made a ground to deny the benefit of parole to the prisoner on the ground that he has already availed this benefit from 7.4.1997 to 22.4.1997.

In view of the above, the petition is accepted and the respondents are directed to release the petitioner on parole with effect from 16.6.1997 for a period of 10 days. The petitioner shall furnish necessary bonds to the satisfaction of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bhiwani. The Chief Judicial Magistrate is directed to take requisite steps to see that the petitioner is released on parole with effect from 16.6.1997.

The petitioner shall surrender before the Superintendent, District Jail, Bhiwani on 26.6.1997 failing which it shall be the duty of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bhiwani to take all necessary steps for securing the arrest of the petitioner.