Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

MALIK RAM versus STATE OF HARYANA

High Court of Punjab and Haryana, Chandigarh

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Malik Ram v. State of Haryana - CRM-74195-M-2006 [2006] RD-P&H 12885 (19 December 2006)

Crl. Misc. No. 74195-M of 2006.

****

Malik Ram vs State of Haryana

..

PRESENT: Mr. Sachin Kapur, Advocate,

for the petitioner.

Mr. Tarun Aggarwal, Sr. DAG, Haryana.

**

The prayer in this petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is to quash the order dated 9.10.2006 (Annexure P-1) passed by the Director General of Prisons, Haryana, vide which petitioner's request for grant of three weeks Furlough in terms of Section 4(1) of the Haryana Good Conduct Prisons (Temporary Release) Act, 1988, has been turned down.

It appears that in his application, the petitioner sought three weeks Furlough on the ground that he wants to meet his family members.

Consequently, while rejecting his request vide the impugned order, the authorities have stated that the petitioner had been meeting his family members frequently while he was on parole and also that his family members have been regularly visiting the jail to meet him.

Notice of motion was issued and in response thereto, written statement has been filed by the Superintendent, District Jail, Rohtak, on behalf of the respondents. In the written statement also, same stand has been reiterated.

On perusal of Section 8 of the Act, it is apparent that for the temporary release on Furlough, a prisoner is required to fulfill the pre- conditions laid down in the said provision itself including his good conduct and continuous imprisonment for a period of three years inclusive of the pre-sentence detention, if any. The fact that the petitioner has been frequently meeting his family members either being on parole or that they have been visiting him in the jail, is thus wholly irrelevant for his temporary release on Furlough.

Consequently, this petition is allowed. The impugned order dated 9.10.2006 is quashed and a direction is issued to the Director General of Prisons, Haryana to reconsider the case of the petitioner for his temporary release on Furlough strictly in the light of the criteria as prescribed under Section 4 of the Act read with the Government policy, if any, in this regard.

Necessary decision shall be taken within a period of one month from the date a certified copy of this order is supplied.

Disposed of.

January 08, 2007 ( SURYA KANT )

dinesh JUDGE


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.