Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

SULTAN SINGH versus STATE OF PUNJAB & ORS.

High Court of Punjab and Haryana, Chandigarh

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Sultan Singh v. State of Punjab & Ors. - CRM-5260-M-2007 [2007] RD-P&H 770 (22 January 2007)

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

Crl. Misc. No. 5260-M of 2007.

Date of Decision: January 29, 2007.

Sultan Singh

....Petitioner

through

Mr. C.S.Rana, Advocate

Versus

State of Punjab & Ors.

...Respondents

through

Mr. Amit Khanna, AAG, Punjab.

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)

Notice of motion.

Mr. Amit Khanna, learned AAG, Punjab, accepts notice.

The petitioner, who is undergoing RI for ten years under the NDPS Act is aggrieved at the order dated 10.1.2007 (Annexure P-1) passed by the Director General of Police (Prisons), Punjab, whereby parole for six weeks has been denied to him on the ground that he may indulge in the business of poppy husk which is likely to have a bad impact on the society.

Undoubtedly, if a convict mis-uses the concession of parole and indulges in illegal activities like selling of poppy husk etc., the authorities will be justified in forming an opinion and turning down his request for such concession. At the same time, it is imperative upon the authorities to consider and form such an opinion on the basis of some material on record.

From the impugned order, it is not discernible that the petitioner is a habitual offender and/or he has ever misused the concession of parole etc. in the past or that in the jail also, his behaviour has been unsatisfactory.

Needless to say, the opinion as formed by the authorities, ought to have been drawn by them on the basis of some material on record.

Consequently, this petition is allowed; the impugned order dated 10.1.2007 (Annexure P-1) is set aside and the Director General of Police (Prisons), Punjab, is directed to reconsider the case of the petitioner in the light of the observations made herein above within a period of two months from the date a certified copy of this order is received.

Disposed of.

January 29, 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.