Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

SHANKDAR @ RINKU versus STATE OF HARYANA & ANR.

High Court of Punjab and Haryana, Chandigarh

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Shankdar @ Rinku v. State of Haryana & Anr. - CRM-3231-M-2007 [2007] RD-P&H 1178 (1 February 2007)

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

Crl. Misc. No.3231-M of 2007

Date of decision: January 19, 2007.

Shankdar @ Rinku

...Petitioner(s)

v.

State of Haryana & Anr.

...Respondent(s)

Present: Shri Pawan Hooda, Advocate for the petitioner.

Shri Ravi Dutt Sharma, Deputy Advocate General, Haryana, for the respondents.

Surya Kant, J. (Oral)

Notice of motion. Shri Ravi Dutt Sharma, learned Deputy Advocate General, Haryana, accepts notice on behalf of the respondents.

The petitioner, who is a life convict, is aggrieved at the order dated 7.12.2006 (Annexure P2) passed by the Director General of Prisons, Haryana whereby parole for house repair has been denied to him on the ground that he is having party faction in the village and if released on parole, there is apprehension of breach of peace.

From the impugned order, it is apparent that there is no dispute that the petitioner's house requires repairs.

As far as the apprehension of breach of peace expressed by the respondents is concerned, it is well known that several remedial measures can be taken. The petitioner can be asked not only to furnish his own personal bond but also of his other family members, respectables of the village and/or office-bearers of the Gram Panchayat also. Similarly, he can be asked to report to the nearest police station at least twice a week. A vigil on his activities by the village chowkidar, can be another mode to ensure that no untoward incident takes place.

Consequently, and for the reasons afore-stated, this petition is allowed to the extent that the impugned order dated 7.12.2006 (Annexure P- 2) is quashed and the Director General of Prisons, Haryana is directed to reconsider the petitioner's case for temporary release on parole for house repair in the light of the observations made here-in-above. The necessary orders in this regard shall be passed within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order.

January 19, 2007. [ Surya Kant ]

kadyan 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.