JAI SINGH SEKHON,J - (1.) GURMAIL Singh prisoner has filed this writ petition under Articles 2261227 of the Constitution of India for his temporary release on parole for effecting house repairs under section 3 of the Punjab Good Conduct Prisoners (Temporary Release) Act; 1962, contending that the concerned authorities had rejected his petition in this regard on extraneous grounds although his conduct in the jail had always been good. It is further maintained that his house gate damaged during the recent rains and a certificate of the Municipal Committee has been filed as Annexure P.1 to the petition.
(2.) IN the counter affidavit filed by Dhanna Singh, Chief Probation Officer, it is maintained that although the Superintendent of Jail had recommended the parole case of the detenu but the same was rejected by the Inspector General of Prisons, Punjab vide letter dated 6-2-1989 on the adverse report of the district authorities. The respondent was directed to file detailed report of the district authorities referred to above. A perusal of this report shows that the local police had recorded the statements of some persons of the opposite faction showing I heir apprehension of danger to their lives at the hands of the petitioner if released on parole. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties besides perusing the record. Section 6 of the Punjab Good Conduct Prisoners (Temporary Release) Act, 1962 provides that prisoners are not entitled to temporary release under sections 3 and 4 of the Act if the District Magistrate is satisfied that his release is likely to endanger the security of the State of maintenance of public order. Thus, by no stretch of imagination, apprehension of danger to the life of the persons of the opposite faction at the hands of the petitioner if released on parole would amount to endangering the security of the State or maintenance. of the public order. Therefore, it appears to be a clear case of non-exercise of power vested in the authorities on some wrong assumed notions regarding the maintenance of public order.
(3.) CONSEQUENTLY , the authorities are directed to release the petitioner on 4 weeks parole forthwith on his furnishing requisite bond to the satisfaction of the District Magistrate, Faridkot.;