Counsel for the petitioner restricts his prayer qua issuance of directions to the appropriate authority to pass an order on the application: High court of Punjab and Haryana

The petitioner has filed for a criminal writ petition i.e. “A writ is defined as a formal written order issued by a higher court which requests a lower court or a government entity to take action. Warrants, orders, directions, and subpoenas are all considered writs. When it comes to criminal cases, a defendant may file one or more writs in one trial.” And the petitioner prayed before the court to direct the respondents to release the petitioner on parole. The judgment and order were given in the high court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh, on the 9th of July 2021 by the Hon’ble Mr. Justice Jaswant Singh and Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sant Parkash in the case of Gurdeep Singh v/s state of Punjab and others Criminal Writ Petition No. 6160 of 2021, The proceedings of the court were held on a virtual platform through video conference.

According to the counsel of the petitioner (Mr. Bikramjeet Singh Jatana ) the petitioner request the court to grant him release on parole for eight weeks the reason behind is in order to take care of his old aged parents and to help them with their eye surgery which has been mentioned under section 3 and 4 of the Punjab good conduct prisoners(Temporary Release) Amendment act, 2015. The petitioner was sentenced to undergo life imprisonment according to an order on the 6th of June 2019 which was passed by the additional sessions judge, Mansa. As he was convicted for an offense under section 302 IPC i.e., “Punishment for murder. —Whoever commits murder shall be punished with death or imprisonment for life, and shall also be liable to fine.” 

section 34 IPC i.e., “Acts done by several persons in furtherance of common intention. —When a criminal act is done by several persons in furtherance of the common intention of all, each of such persons is liable for that act in the same manner as if it were done by him alone.”. however, this petition has been filed for final adjudication and against the previous order.

According to the case, the mother of the petitioner (Jarnail Kaur) approached the superintendent of jail, at the central jail Bathinda, (respondent -no.4) and pleaded for the grant of parole for two months on the grounds for her eye surgery as she and her husband might have lost their eyesight, but no action was taken. They have also approached the competent authorities to grant him parole but the same was never granted.  There was no action taken on the application dated 20/01/2021.

The court was however not convinced to grant the petitioner parole; therefore, the petitioner restricted his prayer to give directions to the appropriate authority to pass an order for parole of the petitioner on the grounds which has been stated. Mr. I.P.S Doabia, the advocate general representing the state of Punjab concedes that an order is required to be passed by the authority, and he has no objection to the same. The court held that “In view of above, the present petition is disposed of with a direction to the competent authority to pass an order on the application dated 20.01.2021 (P-1) of Jarnail Kaur (mother of the petitioner) seeking to release the petitioner on parole, in accordance with law as early as possible.”

Click here to read the judgment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Open chat