Jammu & Kashmir High Court Directs Construction of Overhead Bridge or Underpass on Ring Road for Safe Passage of Villagers Minor Injuries No Bar for Framing Charges Under Section 307 IPC if Intent to Kill is Present: Supreme Court Prosecution's Case Full of Glaring Doubts:  Supreme Court Overturns Conviction in Abduction and Murder Case Allegations of Dowry Demand in FIR Found Vague and Driven by Civil Property Dispute: Supreme Court Quashes FIR and Chargesheet in Dowry-Cruelty Case Local Police Failed to Perform its Duties: SC Directs New Investigating Officer in Property Dispute Properties Acquired By Gift During Marriage Remain Separate Property Of Spouse Under French Civil Code; Husband Entitled To Half Share Only In Community Assets: Madras High Court Abuse Of Process: Supreme Court Dismisses Plea Against Closure Of Human Trafficking Complaint, Flags Lack Of Bona Fides Access To Justice Cannot Be Denied When Tribunal Is Not Functioning': Calcutta High Court Holds Writ Maintainable Under Article 226 Amid Stalled Conciliation Proceedings Violation Of Natural Justice Overrides Bar On Maintainability Under Section 18 MSMED Act: Orissa High Court Panic In A Train Does Not Mean Self-Destruction: Punjab & Haryana High Court Grants ₹8 Lakh Compensation For Passenger's Death In Stampede Section 101 JJ Act | Date Of Knowledge Of Order, Not Mere Knowledge Of Disposal, Commences Limitation Period: Delhi High Court Telangana High Court Quashes Order Declaring Inam Land As Govt Property Without Determining Occupancy Rights Proviso To Section 125(3) CrPC Does Not Limit Enforcement Of Monetary Relief Orders Under Section 20 DV Act: Telangana High Court Regularization Of Deviation Within Permissible Plot Envelope Governed By Uniform Fee Schedule, Arbitrary 5X Penalty Unsustainable: J&K&L High Court Man Who Blackmailed Woman With Her Own Nude Photos To Rape Her Repeatedly Can't Escape Conviction Merely Because His Voice Sample Wasn't Taken: Delhi High Court Arbitration Clause In Sale Agreement Cannot Be Invoked If Subject Matter Involves Third-Party Title Disputes: Madhya Pradesh High Court Trial Court Errs In Dismissing Amendment Plea If New Facts Emerge From Written Statement: Punjab & Haryana High Court 'No Compensation For Own Wrong': Gujarat High Court Rules Tortfeasors & Legal Heirs Cannot Claim Motor Accident Damages Under Section 166 MV Act Allahabad High Court Pulls Up Police And Magistrates Over Illegal Remand Of Juvenile Accused Section 13(1)(ia) & (ib) Hindu Marriage Act | Spouse Seeking Divorce On Grounds Of Cruelty And Desertion Must Prove Allegations With Cogent Evidence: Telangana High Court Cannot Let Land Become Banjar: Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds Appointment Of Receiver Under BNSS Amidst Pending Civil Title Disputes Section 8 Arbitration Act | Executing Court Must Refer Parties To Arbitration If Dispute Falls Within Scope Of Compromise Decree: Madhya Pradesh High Court Suit For Damages Arising Out Of Tortious Injury Barred By Limitation If Not Filed Within One Year: Punjab & Haryana High Court 72-Hour Gap Not Proximate: Calcutta High Court Quashes Murder Conviction, Holds 'Last Seen' Theory Inapplicable When Time Gap Is Wide Original Owner Cannot Create Trust Over Property Already Sold; Separate Relief For Title Declaration Not Required: Madras High Court

Privilege, Not a Right: High Court Upholds Denial of Parole to Convicted Prisoner

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling, the High Court of Punjab and Haryana affirmed the Superintendent Jail’s decision to deny parole to a life-term convict, citing the individual’s status as a ‘hardcore convicted prisoner.’ The decision was announced on November 6, 2023, by Hon’ble Mr. Justice Deepak Gupta.

The petitioner, Kuldeep @ Balkar, had challenged the order dated March 15, 2023, that rejected his application for temporary release on parole. He sought a writ of certiorari to quash the order and a mandamus to direct his release for a 10-week period under the Haryana Good Conduct Prisoners (Temporary Release) Act, 2022.

However, the court observed, “The remission and parole are not the vested rights of the prisoners. In fact, these are privileges granted by the State to the convicted prisoners,” underscoring the discretionary nature of parole. This observation came in response to the petitioner’s history of committing offenses while on parole, which placed him squarely in the ‘hardcore prisoner’ category as per the Act’s stipulations.

Justice Deepak Gupta highlighted that the petitioner’s criminal actions during previous temporary releases justified the denial of his parole request. The court dismissed the petition, reinforcing the principle that privileges like parole must be earned through good conduct, particularly when public safety is at stake.

The petitioner’s advocate, Mr. Harsh Rana, had argued for the petitioner’s release based on the premise that he had not been convicted for the offenses committed during parole. Nonetheless, the court’s analysis centered on the legislative intent to prevent further offenses by those already deemed a risk, which ultimately led to the dismissal of the petitioner’s request for release.

The decision has reaffirmed the judiciary’s cautious approach towards granting parole, especially to those with a history of re-offending while out of custody. The ruling is expected to have a significant impact on parole proceedings, especially for prisoners classified as ‘hardcore.’            Date of Decision: 06.11.2023

KULDEEP @ BALKAR VS STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS 

Latest Legal News