SUBEY SINGH Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER Subey Singh has filed this petition asserting that the application moved by him to the respondents for grant of parole in order to enable him to carry out agricultural operations has been rejected by the respondents on the basis of the report submitted by the District Magistrate, Panipat, that the petitioner is having other members at home who can look after the agricultural operations. Petitioner is seeking grant of parole under Section 3(1)(c) of the Haryana Good Conduct Prisoners (Temporary Release) Act, 1988 on the ground that he owns 5 acres of land and is in cultivating possession of it. He further averred that his family is having no other source of income and for livelihood depends upon agricultural income only.

(2.) IN the written statement filed on behalf of the respondents, the Superintendent, District Jail, Sonepat, has reiterated the stand taken by the District Magistrate, Panipat for rejecting the claim of the petitioner.

(3.) EVEN if the report of the District Magistrate, Panipat for the sake of arguments, is taken to be correct, then too, in my considered view, the presence of an additional member of the family to supervise the cultivation of the land cannot be said to the unnecessary so as to disentitle him for grant of parole. In a country where agricultural operations are by and large undertaken manually, the presence of every additional member of the family at the time of cultivation would be of great help in cultivation of the land. In these circumstances, where the petitioner is admittedly in cultivating possession of agricultural land, his application for agricultural parole ought not to have been rejected."