Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

SANT KUMAR versus STATE OF HARYANA & ORS.

High Court of Punjab and Haryana, Chandigarh

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Sant Kumar v. State of Haryana & Ors. - CRM-61792-M-2006 [2007] RD-P&H 190 (10 January 2007)

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

Crl. Misc. No. 61792-M of 2006.

Date of Decision: January 16, 2007.

Sant Kumar

....Petitioner

through

Ms. Tanu Bedi, Advocate

Versus

State of Haryana & Ors.

...Respondents

through

Mr. Tarun Aggarwal, Sr.DAG, Haryana.

CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURYA KANT.

1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?

2. To be referred to the Reporters or not?

3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? SURYA KANT,J.(ORAL)

The petitioner, who is a life convict and is a permanent resident of District Bhind (Madhya Pradesh), has been denied temporary release on parole on the basis of a report sent by the District Magistrate, Bhind whereby he has not recommended the petitioner's release.

On a perusal of the report of the District Magistrate, one finds it totally laconic as no reason for not recommending the petitioner's case for parole, has been assigned. The competent authority has also accepted the said report mechanically, resulting into passing of the impugned order.

On a query by the Court, learned State Counsel is not in a position to disclose any adverse material/circumstances on the basis of which the petitioner should be denied parole for house repairs. He only contends that since the petitioner belongs to the State of Madhya Pradesh, in the event of his release, he should be asked to furnish heavy bail bonds so that there is no possibility of his absconding.

After hearing learned counsel for the parties and having regard to the fact that the petitioner has been denied parole for house repairs without assigning any reason whatsoever, this petition is allowed to the extent that the impugned order dated 18.9.2006 (Annexure P-1) is quashed.

Similarly, the report sent by the District Magistrate, Bhind is also set aside.

It is directed that a self-speaking report be obtained from the District Magistrate, Bhind in relation to the condition of the petitioner's house in the village; his antecedents and past social behaviour; whether there is any possibility of his absconding or not and; as to whether some respectables of the village are willing to stand surety for him, if he is released on parole.

After obtaining the said report, the Director General of Prisons, Haryana shall take appropriate afresh decision on the petitioner's request to release him for house repairs. The entire exercise shall be carried out within two months from the date a certified copy of this order is received.

Disposed of.

January 16, 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.