Bhinder Singh @ Palvinder Singh @ ... vs State Of Punjab And Others
2021 Latest Caselaw 660 P&H

207         THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
                    AT CHANDIGARH

                                              CRWP-10670-2020
                                              Date of Decision: 18.02.2021


BHINDER SINGH @ PALVINDER SINGH @ CHUHI
                                 ... PETITIONER
             VS
STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS       ... RESPONDENTS


CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA CHAUHAN
       HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIVEK PURI

Present:    Mr. Vishal Khatri, Advocate for the petitioner.

            Mr. H.S.Sullar, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab.

        ***
JITENDRA CHAUHAN , J. (ORAL)

The matter has been taken up through video conferencing in the

light of the pandemic Covid-19 situation and as per instructions.

Prayer in the present petition filed under Articles 226/227 of the

Constitution of India is for grant of eight weeks parole for treatment of the

mother of the petitioner who is suffering from liver disease with jaundice

and severe urinary track infection. The petitioner was convicted and

sentenced by learned trial Court vide its judgment and order dated 19.8.2015

to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 20 years in Complaint case

registered under Sections 21, 23, 25, 27-A, 28, 29, 60 of NDPS Act, 1985.

Status report dated 8.2.2021 on behalf of respondent Nos. 1, 2,

3 and 6 has been circulated by the learned State counsel in the Court today

through E-mail and the same is taken on record.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is

in continuous custody for the last approximately seven years. He is not a

hardcore prisoner. No recovery was effected from him. However, on the

1 of 3

disclosure statement, recovery of 200 gms of heroin has been shown to be

effected from the petitioner which is not a commercial quantity. Co-accused

of the petitioner, namely, Gurmit Singh @ Gopi has been granted the

concession of parole on various occasions by this Court. The petitioner has

always maintained good conduct inside the jail.

Learned State counsel submits that the petitioner is a habitual

offender and is involved in three more cases i.e. FIR No. 14 of 2017

registered under Sections 420 of IPC & 42/52-A of Prison Act, Police

Station Gate Hakima, Amritsar, FIR No. 101 of 2007 registered under

Section 323 of IPC, Police Station Bhikhiwind and complaint case under

Sections 452, 326, 324, 323, 148, 149 of IPC registered at Police Station

Bhikhiwind. The petitioner has also been convicted in Sessions Case No. 52

of 2011, under Section 21 (c), 23 (c), 29 of NDPS Act, Police Station DRI

and was sentenced to undergo a RI for 20 years vide order dated 19.8.2015.

Heard.

We find that two of the FIRs are under IPC whereas another

FIR is under NDPS Act, wherein the sentence of the petitioner has already

been suspended. The petitioner is on bail in the complaint case. In FIR No.

101 of 2007, the petitioner has been ordered to be released from custody by

the learned trial court vide order dated 16.12.2013, whereas the petitioner is

suffering trial in FIR No.14 of 2017.

The medical history of the mother of the petitioner (Annexure

P-7) indicates that mother of the petitioner is a chronic patient of liver

disease and jaundice. While under treatment, she was also diagnosed as case

of severe urinary track infection. Taking into account seriousness of her

disease, the Doctor has suggested good family care and treatment to save her 2 of 3

life. Whereas, in the reply it has been stated that the documents are not

sufficient enough to comment on the full current medical condition of the

patient for medico-legal purposes, except that the mother of the petitioner

has been taking treatment for her ailment. The respondents ought to have

made an effort to seek the opinion regarding the medical status of the mother

of the petitioner.

Considering the above, the present petition is allowed and the

petitioner is granted eight weeks parole, subject to his furnishing indemnity

bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with two local sureties of the like amount to

the satisfaction of the competent authority/Duty Magistrate. The petitioner

shall surrender before the jail authorities on the date and time to be notified

by the releasing Court/Duty Magistrate.

[JITENDRA CHAUHAN]                                    [VIVEK PURI]
      JUDGE                                              JUDGE


18.2.2021
Janki




                                3 of 3