CRWP-10534 IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND 308 Rampal State of Haryana and others CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA Present:- MANISHA BATRA, J. 1. Constitution of India for quashing the order dated 14.06.2024 (Annexure P the petitioner for grant of parole has been rejected. 2. petitioner had been held guilty and convicted for No. 286 of 2001 at Police Station Rohtak and had been sentenc imprisonment. dismissed by this Court, vide judgment dated 911-DB-2003 which had been re dated 14.06.2024 on the ground that the case of the petitioner falls under 10534-2024 (O&M) IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Versus State of Haryana and others CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA Mr. Ravinder Bangar, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Neeraj Poswal, AAG, Haryana. MANISHA BATRA, J. (Oral) The present petition has been filed under Article Constitution of India for issuance of a writ in the nature of Certiorari for quashing the order dated 14.06.2024 (Annexure P the petitioner for grant of parole has been rejected. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that petitioner had been held guilty and convicted for 286 of 2001, registered under Sections 302, 307, 323, 148 and 149 of IPC at Police Station Rohtak and had been sentenc imprisonment. He had filed an appeal against his conviction, which had been dismissed by this Court, vide judgment dated 003. The petitioner had applied for grant of parole for 70 days which had been rejected by the authorities by passing the impugned order dated 14.06.2024 on the ground that the case of the petitioner falls under -1 IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRWP-10534-2024 (O&M) Date of decision: 31.07.2025 ...Petitioner Versus ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA Ravinder Bangar, Advocate Mr. Neeraj Poswal, AAG, Haryana. The present petition has been filed under Articles 226/227 of the issuance of a writ in the nature of Certiorari for quashing the order dated 14.06.2024 (Annexure P-1), whereby the claim of the petitioner for grant of parole has been rejected. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that petitioner had been held guilty and convicted for in case arising out of FIR s 302, 307, 323, 148 and 149 of IPC at Police Station Rohtak and had been sentenced to undergo life had filed an appeal against his conviction, which had been dismissed by this Court, vide judgment dated 19.09.2008 passed in CRA The petitioner had applied for grant of parole for 70 days jected by the authorities by passing the impugned order dated 14.06.2024 on the ground that the case of the petitioner falls under 1- (O&M) 31.07.2025 ...Petitioner ...Respondents of the issuance of a writ in the nature of Certiorari for 1), whereby the claim of the in case arising out of FIR s 302, 307, 323, 148 and 149 of IPC ed to undergo life had filed an appeal against his conviction, which had been CRA-D- The petitioner had applied for grant of parole for 70 days jected by the authorities by passing the impugned order dated 14.06.2024 on the ground that the case of the petitioner falls under MOHAMMAD WASEEM ANSARI 2025.07.31 18:04 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRWP-10534 hardcore category. The observations so made were based on the fact that the petitioner was released on 04 weeks parole surrender on 16.07.2004 but he did not surrender and kept on absconding for more than 17 years and an FIR bearing No. 264 dated 27.05.2005, under Sections 8 and 9 of the HGCP Act was registered against him at Police Station Sadar Gurugram. How FIR No. 264 was totally ignored by the authorities. It is further argued that the Gram Panchayat concerned has given a certificate dated 18.10.2024 (Annexure P the petitioner is released on parole. The petitioner is eligible to be released on parole for 70 days as per the provisions of Haryana Good Conduct Prisoners (Temporary Release) Act, 2022 the Act, 2022, even a hardcore prisoner is entitled to be released on parole. The total custody period of the petitioner is more than 06 years and in case he is granted benefit of parole, he will surrender within the time stipulated. therefore, urged that the present petition deserves to be allowed order is liable to be set aside emergency parole for a period of 3. Advocate General, Haryana in the impugned order. 17.06.2004 However, years, 03 months and 09 days before having been re 10534-2024 (O&M) hardcore category. The observations so made were based on the fact that the petitioner was released on 04 weeks parole surrender on 16.07.2004 but he did not surrender and kept on absconding for more than 17 years and an FIR bearing No. 264 dated 27.05.2005, under Sections 8 and 9 of the HGCP Act was registered against him at Police Station Gurugram. However, the fact that the petitioner had been acquitted in FIR No. 264 was totally ignored by the authorities. It is further argued that the Gram Panchayat concerned has given a certificate dated 18.10.2024 (Annexure P-2) to the effect that there is no appre the petitioner is released on parole. The petitioner is eligible to be released on parole for 70 days as per the provisions of Haryana Good Conduct Prisoners (Temporary Release) Act, 2022 (for short ‘the Act, 2022’) the Act, 2022, even a hardcore prisoner is entitled to be released on parole. The total custody period of the petitioner is more than 06 years and in case he is granted benefit of parole, he will surrender within the time stipulated. efore, urged that the present petition deserves to be allowed order is liable to be set aside and the petitioner deserves to be granted emergency parole for a period of 70 days. Reply has been filed by the respondent Advocate General, Haryana has argued that there is no illegality or infirmity in the impugned order. The petitioner was 4 for a period of 04 weeks and he However, he did not surrender and kept on absconding for a period of 17 years, 03 months and 09 days before having been re -2 hardcore category. The observations so made were based on the fact that the petitioner was released on 04 weeks parole on 17.06.2004 and was to surrender on 16.07.2004 but he did not surrender and kept on absconding for more than 17 years and an FIR bearing No. 264 dated 27.05.2005, under Sections 8 and 9 of the HGCP Act was registered against him at Police Station ever, the fact that the petitioner had been acquitted in FIR No. 264 was totally ignored by the authorities. It is further argued that the Gram Panchayat concerned has given a certificate dated 18.10.2024 2) to the effect that there is no apprehension of breach of peace if the petitioner is released on parole. The petitioner is eligible to be released on parole for 70 days as per the provisions of Haryana Good Conduct Prisoners (for short ‘the Act, 2022’). As per Section 6 of the Act, 2022, even a hardcore prisoner is entitled to be released on parole. The total custody period of the petitioner is more than 06 years and in case he is granted benefit of parole, he will surrender within the time stipulated. It is, efore, urged that the present petition deserves to be allowed, the impugned and the petitioner deserves to be granted Reply has been filed by the respondent-State. Learned Assistant has argued that there is no illegality or infirmity The petitioner was previously granted parole and he was to surrender on 16.07.2004 he did not surrender and kept on absconding for a period of 17 years, 03 months and 09 days before having been re-arrested. During the said 2- hardcore category. The observations so made were based on the fact that the .2004 and was to surrender on 16.07.2004 but he did not surrender and kept on absconding for more than 17 years and an FIR bearing No. 264 dated 27.05.2005, under Sections 8 and 9 of the HGCP Act was registered against him at Police Station ever, the fact that the petitioner had been acquitted in FIR No. 264 was totally ignored by the authorities. It is further argued that the Gram Panchayat concerned has given a certificate dated 18.10.2024 hension of breach of peace if the petitioner is released on parole. The petitioner is eligible to be released on parole for 70 days as per the provisions of Haryana Good Conduct Prisoners ction 6 of the Act, 2022, even a hardcore prisoner is entitled to be released on parole. The total custody period of the petitioner is more than 06 years and in case he It is, , the impugned and the petitioner deserves to be granted State. Learned Assistant has argued that there is no illegality or infirmity granted parole on was to surrender on 16.07.2004. he did not surrender and kept on absconding for a period of 17 arrested. During the said MOHAMMAD WASEEM ANSARI 2025.07.31 18:04 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRWP-10534 period, the aforementioned FIR No. 264 was also registered against him. In view thereof, he is not entitled to be released on parole. that the petition is liable to be dismissed. 4. and have also gone through the record carefully. 5. imprisonment. dismissed by this Court, benefit of back on 16.07.20 than 17 years. 2(1)(g)(v), a prisoner shall be considered to be hardcore prisoner who surrender himself within a period of ten days from the date on which he should have so surrendered on the expiry of the period of parole for which he was released. of hardcore pris 2022, a hardcore prisoner can be granted parole after five years from latest offence or act which falls under the category of hardcore prisoner. Hence, since the petitioner has not completed f confinement in jail, he has rightly been denied the benefit of parole. Even otherwise, a perusal of the petition nowhere reveals as to on what grounds the petitioner is seeking grant of parole for 70 days. Court is of the considered opinion that no ground has been made out to issue any direction to the respondent 10534-2024 (O&M) period, the aforementioned FIR No. 264 was also registered against him. In view thereof, he is not entitled to be released on parole. that the petition is liable to be dismissed. I have heard learned counsel for the parties at considerable length and have also gone through the record carefully. The petitioner had been convicted and sentenced imprisonment. He had filed an appeal against his conviction, which had been dismissed by this Court, as mentioned above benefit of parole for a period of 04 weeks and was scheduled to surrender 16.07.2004 but he did not do so and absconded for a period of more than 17 years. Eventually, he was arrested on 05.11.2021. (g)(v), a prisoner shall be considered to be hardcore prisoner who surrender himself within a period of ten days from the date on which he should have so surrendered on the expiry of the period of parole for which he was released. In view thereof, the petitioner certainly falls under the category of hardcore prisoners. Further, as per sub- 2022, a hardcore prisoner can be granted parole after five years from latest offence or act which falls under the category of hardcore prisoner. Hence, since the petitioner has not completed f confinement in jail, he has rightly been denied the benefit of parole. Even otherwise, a perusal of the petition nowhere reveals as to on what grounds the petitioner is seeking grant of parole for 70 days. Court is of the considered opinion that no ground has been made out to issue any direction to the respondent-authorities to release the petitioner on -3 period, the aforementioned FIR No. 264 was also registered against him. In view thereof, he is not entitled to be released on parole. Therefore, it is urged I have heard learned counsel for the parties at considerable length and have also gone through the record carefully. been convicted and sentenced for He had filed an appeal against his conviction, which had been as mentioned above. The petitioner was granted weeks and was scheduled to surrender did not do so and absconded for a period of more Eventually, he was arrested on 05.11.2021. As per Section (g)(v), a prisoner shall be considered to be hardcore prisoner who fails to surrender himself within a period of ten days from the date on which he should have so surrendered on the expiry of the period of parole for which he In view thereof, the petitioner certainly falls under the category -section (3) of Section 6 of the Act, 2022, a hardcore prisoner can be granted parole after five years from latest offence or act which falls under the category of hardcore prisoner. Hence, since the petitioner has not completed five years from the date of his confinement in jail, he has rightly been denied the benefit of parole. Even otherwise, a perusal of the petition nowhere reveals as to on what grounds the petitioner is seeking grant of parole for 70 days. In view of the same, Court is of the considered opinion that no ground has been made out to issue authorities to release the petitioner on 3- period, the aforementioned FIR No. 264 was also registered against him. In Therefore, it is urged I have heard learned counsel for the parties at considerable length for life He had filed an appeal against his conviction, which had been The petitioner was granted weeks and was scheduled to surrender did not do so and absconded for a period of more As per Section fails to surrender himself within a period of ten days from the date on which he should have so surrendered on the expiry of the period of parole for which he In view thereof, the petitioner certainly falls under the category section (3) of Section 6 of the Act, 2022, a hardcore prisoner can be granted parole after five years from latest offence or act which falls under the category of hardcore prisoner. Hence, ive years from the date of his confinement in jail, he has rightly been denied the benefit of parole. Even otherwise, a perusal of the petition nowhere reveals as to on what grounds the , this Court is of the considered opinion that no ground has been made out to issue authorities to release the petitioner on MOHAMMAD WASEEM ANSARI 2025.07.31 18:04 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRWP-10534 emergency parole for the period as prayed for by him. Accordingly, the present petition is dismisse 31.07.2025 Waseem Ansari Whether speaking/reasoned Whether reportable 10534-2024 (O&M) emergency parole for the period as prayed for by him. Accordingly, the present petition is dismissed. .07.2025 Whether speaking/reasoned Whether reportable -4 emergency parole for the period as prayed for by him. Accordingly, the (MANISHA BATRA) JUDGE Yes/No Yes/No 4- emergency parole for the period as prayed for by him. Accordingly, the MOHAMMAD WASEEM ANSARI 2025.07.31 18:04 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document