SATPAL Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER -Satpal who is undergoing 10 years imprisonment under Section 18 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the NDPS Act') had moved the respondents for initiating his case for parole on 28.5.1999 on the ground that he wanted to carry out necessary repairs of his house. His case was rejected by the authorities on the ground that neither the prisoner nor his parents have a house of their own and so there was no ground for granting the petitioner any relief. This rejection has occasioned the filing of the present petition.

(2.) IT has been submitted on behalf of Satpal that since there was no apprehension of breach of peace and there was nothing in the Haryana Good Conduct Prisoners (Temporary Release) Act, which would dis-entitle a prisoner from availing the concession of parole on the ground that he wants to repair his house because he does not own a house, therefore the order should be set aside and the respondent be directed to grant him the necessary relief.

(3.) HAVING given my careful consideration to the averments made by the counsel for the parties, I feel that the validity of the order passed by the respondents need not be gone into by me in this case in view of the fact that Sat Pal has been convicted and sentenced to 10 years rigorous imprisonment under Section 18 of the NDPS Act. Section 32-A of the NDPS Act indicates that during the pendency of an appeal, the powers of suspension, remission and commutation will not be exercised by the government in the cases of persons who are convicted for offences under the NDPS Act. In this view of the matter, without commenting upon the validity of the order, this petition is dismissed. Petition dismissed.