In the High Court for the States of Punjab and Haryana At Chandigarh CRWP-688-2025 (O&M) Date of Decision:-4.12.2025 Lalit Kumar @ Babbal … Petitioner Versus State of Punjab and others ... Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GURVINDER SINGH GILL HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE RAMESH KUMARI Present:- Mr. Prateek Pandit, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Adeshwar Singh Pannu, AAG, Punjab. ***** GURVINDER SINGH GILL, J. (Oral) 1. The petitioner assails order dated 13.12.2024 (Annexure P-4) passed by respondent No.2 – Deputy Commissioner-cum-District Magistrate, District Tarn Taran vide which his prayer for grant of parole has been declined while observing that the applicant is a ‘hardcore criminal’ and his release would endanger peace and security. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the authorities concerned fell in error in observing that the petitioner is a hardcore prisoner, whereas his case does not fall within the ambit of “hardcore prisoner” as defined in Section 2 (aa) of The Punjab Good Conduct Prisoners (Temporary Release) Act, 1962 (hereinafter refereed to as “the Act”). 3. We have heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned State counsel and have also gone through the impugned order. PANKAJ KAKKAR 2025.12.05 11:11 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment Punjab & Haryana High Court at Chandigarh CRWP-688-2025 (O&M) ( 2 ) 4. The petitioner stands convicted vide order dated 29.9.2022 pursuant to judgment dated 28.9.2022 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Jalandhar for having committed offence punishable under Sections 364-A, 342, 148, 307, 325, 482 of Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of Arms Act. He has been sentenced as under: Offence Under Section(s) Imprisonment Fine In default of payment of fine 364-A IPC R.I. for life Rs.1 lakh R.I. for 2 years 342 IPC R.I. for 1 year Rs.1,000/- R.I. for 1 month 148 IPC R.I. for 2 years Rs.2,000/- R.I. for 2 months 307 IPC R.I. for 5 years Rs.5,000/- R.I. for 3 months 325 IPC R.I. for 2 years Rs.5,000/- R.I. for 3 months 482 IPC R.I. for 1 year Rs.2,000/- R.I. for 2 months 27 of Arms Act R.I. for 3 years Rs.5,000/- R.I. for 3 months 5. Section 2 (aa) of the Act defines ‘hardcore prisoner’ as under: “Section 2(aa): (aa) "hardcore prisoner" means a person confined in prison under a sentence of imprisonment, who has been convicted of - (i) an offence of rape with murder under section 376 read with section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860; (ii) an offence punishable under section 14 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012;]” 6. The provisions pertaining to release of a prisoner on parole are spelt out in Section 3 of the Act. Section 5-A of the Act further lays down certain conditions, where a prisoner is not entitled to be released on parole. Section 5-A of the Act is reproduced herein-under: “5-A. Prisoner not entitled to be released in certain cases:- Notwithstanding anything contained in sections 3 and 4, - PANKAJ KAKKAR 2025.12.05 11:11 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment Punjab & Haryana High Court at Chandigarh CRWP-688-2025 (O&M) ( 3 ) (a) no prisoner shall be entitled to be released under this Act to whom the death sentence has been awarded or is a hardcore, prisoner; (b) Notwithstanding anything contained in clause (a), hardcore prisoner may be allowed to be released temporarily on the ground specified in clause (a) or clause (b) of sub-section (1) of section (3). However, extra conditions may be imposed on the prisoner at the time of temporary release or furlough after considering all the facts and circumstances of the case.]” 7. While a perusal of Section 5-A of the Act does show that a ‘hardcore prisoner’ is not entitled to be released on parole except under some exceptional circumstances, we find that the case of the petitioner would not fall within the definition of the ‘hardcore prisoner’ as he does not stand convicted for any of the offences enumerated in Section 2(aa) of the Act. Thus, we find that the observations as recorded by the authorities concerned by referring the petitioner as a ‘hardcore prisoner’ are unwarranted. Consequently, the impugned order 13.12.2024 (Annexure P-4) passed by respondent No.2 – Deputy Commissioner-cum-District Magistrate, District Tarn Taran is set aside. The authorities concerned to decide the matter afresh in accordance with law expeditiously preferably within a period of 3 weeks from today. 8. The instant petition stands disposed off accordingly. ( GURVINDER SINGH GILL ) JUDGE 4.12.2025 ( RAMESH KUMARI ) Pankaj JUDGE Whether speaking /reasoned Yes / No Whether Reportable Yes / No PANKAJ KAKKAR 2025.12.05 11:11 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment Punjab & Haryana High Court at Chandigarh