IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Sr. No.103 Shabnam State of Haryana and others CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK SIBAL HON'BLE M Present : Mr. Randeep Mr.P.P.Chahar, Sr. DAG DEEPAK SIBAL, J (1) At the outset, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he restricts his prayer to the issuance of directions to respondent No. Ambala Division, Authorities, District Jail, 16.04.2025 for grant of parole to the petitioner, as the same has been pending decision for the last over four months. (2) Learned State counsel has no objection to the acceptance of the afore alternate prayer made on behalf of the petitioner. (3) After hearing le record, we find that the decision on the unnecessarily delayed by the State which is also against the spirit behind Section 12 of the Haryana Good Conduct Prisoner (4) In the light of the above, we dispose of the instant petition with a direction to respondent No. grant of parole, within two weeks from the date of receipt accordance with law. 26.08.2025 vandana Whether speaking/reasoned Whether reportable IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Versus and others HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK SIBAL HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE LAPITA BANERJI Mr. Randeep S. Dhull, Advocate, for the petitioner. P.P.Chahar, Sr. DAG., Haryana. * * * * * DEEPAK SIBAL, J. (Oral) At the outset, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he restricts prayer to the issuance of directions to respondent No. , to finally dispose of the application presented before the Authorities, District Jail, Kurukshetra, Haryana through dispatch No.3186 for grant of parole to the petitioner, as the same has been pending decision for the last over four months. Learned State counsel has no objection to the acceptance of the afore alternate prayer made on behalf of the petitioner. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and going through the record, we find that the decision on the application unnecessarily delayed by the State which is also against the spirit behind Section 12 of the Haryana Good Conduct Prisoners (Temporary Release) Act, 2022. In the light of the above, we dispose of the instant petition with a direction to respondent No.2 to take a final decision on the grant of parole, within two weeks from the date of receipt accordance with law. Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes / No Whether reportable : Yes / No IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRWP-9159-2025 Date of decision : 26.08.2025 .…. Petitioner ..... Respondents HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK SIBAL LAPITA BANERJI , Advocate, for the petitioner. At the outset, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he restricts prayer to the issuance of directions to respondent No.2-Divisional Commissioner, application presented before the Jail through dispatch No.3186-89 dated for grant of parole to the petitioner, as the same has been pending decision Learned State counsel has no objection to the acceptance of the afore arned counsel for the parties and going through the application for grant of parole has been unnecessarily delayed by the State which is also against the spirit behind Section 12 s (Temporary Release) Act, 2022. In the light of the above, we dispose of the instant petition with a to take a final decision on the petitioner’s request for the grant of parole, within two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, in (DEEPAK SIBAL) JUDGE (LAPITA BANERJI) JUDGE 2025 5 At the outset, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he restricts Divisional Commissioner, Jail 89 dated for grant of parole to the petitioner, as the same has been pending decision Learned State counsel has no objection to the acceptance of the afore arned counsel for the parties and going through the for grant of parole has been unnecessarily delayed by the State which is also against the spirit behind Section 12 In the light of the above, we dispose of the instant petition with a for the of a copy of this order, in VANDANA 2025.08.29 09:46 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document