Punjab-Haryana High Court
Rajiv Alias Bobby vs State Of Haryana And Others on 25 April, 2024
Author: Pankaj Jain
Bench: Pankaj Jain
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:057647
2024:PHHC:057647
245 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
CRWP-3180-2024
Date of Decision : 25-04-2024
Rajiv alias Bobby ........Petitioner
Versus
State of Haryana and others ........Respondent(s)
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PANKAJ JAIN
Present:- Mr. Susheel Gautam, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. Ashok Kumar Sehrawat, DAG Haryana.
PANKAJ JAIN, J. (Oral)
1. Reply by way of affidavit of Satyabhan, Deputy
Superintendent, District Jail, Gurugram on behalf of respondent-State has
been filed.
2. By way of the present petition, petitioner has challanged the
order dated 13.03.2024 passed by the Commissioner, Gurugram Division,
District Gurugram rejecting the claim of the petitioner for regular parole.
Petitioner was convicted for offences punishable under Sections 120-B,
364A, 394, 397 IPC and Section 25 of the Arms Act in FIR No.599 dated
16.11.2002 at Police Station Civil Lines, Rohtak and was sentenced to
undergo life imprisonment. To the conviction as on maintained by this
Court as well in the appeal, the details of the cases pending against the
petitioner as well as jail offences as spelled in the reply filed by way of
an affidavit which reads as under:-
2. That, the petitioner was convicted and sentence on 29-03-
2005 by the Ld. Court of Sh. Hari Paran Singh, the Addl. Sessions Judge,
1 of 4
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:057647
CRWP-3180-2024 -2- 2024:PHHC:057647
Rohtak in case FIR No 599/2002 U/s 364-A,343,394,506,120-
1,34,216,365 IPC & 25/54/59 Arms Act (Convicted U/s 120-8, 364-
A/120-8, 394/397 IPC 25 A. Act) P.S Civil Line Rohtak to undergo life
imprisonment and to pay fine of Rs. 16,000/- and in default of payment of
fine, he shall further to undergo 03 year and 03 months R.I. (Fine not
paid). The above said convict filed an appeal against the above judgment
vide CRA-317-DB of 2005 in the Hon'ble High Court, Chandigarh which
was dismissed by the Hon'ble Court vide order dated 18-03-2010.
(a) Details of other convicted cases:
(1) convicted and sentenced on dated 22-01-2019 by the Ld. Court
of Ms. Mansi Dhiman, Judicial Magistrate First Class, Bahadurgarh to
undergo R.I for 06 Months in case FIR No 15 dated 28/01/2011, U/s 8/9
Haryana Good Conduct Prisoner's Act 1988, P.S Line par, Bahadurgarh,
Jhajjar, the said sentence awarded to the convict shall be in addition and
shall run consecutively to the substantive sentence awarded to him in
case FIR No 599 dated 16-11-2002 registered at P.S Civil Line Rohtak
for offences punishable under Sections 364A/394/397/120-B IPC & 25 of
Arms Act.
(b) Details of other cases registered against the said convict :-
(i) FIR No 248 dated 19-10-2017, U/s 307, 34 IPC 25/54/59 A. Act
P.S Line Par Bahadurgarh, Jhajjar on bail.
(ii) FIR No 217 dated 20-06-2018 U/s 398, 401 IPC & 25/54/59 A.
Act P.S Rajendera Park, Gurugram - Acquitted on 13-09-2022.
(iii) FIR No 137 dated 12-06-2017 U/s 307, 511, 452 IPC 25/54/59
A. Act P.S Line Par Bahadurgah, Jhajjar - Acquitted on 11-10-2023.
(c) Jail offences:
On dated 12-03-2020 the petitioner was quarreled with other
inmates of District Jail Jhajjar and he was punished for keeping separate
for 30 days and the same was Judicially appraised by the District and
Sessions Judge Jhajjar vide order No 8659 dated 16-05-2020."
3. The petitioner was released on agriculture parole vide order dated
01.12.2010 and was required to surrender before District Jail Authorities
Jhajjar on 13.01.2011. Petitioner absconded and failed to surrender. He
would be arrested only on 21.06.2018 in FIR No.217 of 2018 registered
for offences punishable under Sections 398 and 401 of IPC and Sections
25 of the Arms Act. Since then, the petitioner is behind bars.
2 of 4
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:057647
CRWP-3180-2024 -3- 2024:PHHC:057647
4. Petitioner has moved an application seeking regular paorle
which stands rejected vide impugned order holding that the petitioner
having violated the conditions of the parole earlier in time does not
deserve to be granted concession of parole as he has been opined to be
threat to security reasons by Sub Divisional Magistrate, Narela, Delhi as
he falls within the category of "hardcore" criminal.
5. Counsel for the petitioner relies upon Section 6(3) of the
Parole Act 2022 Act to submit that the petitioner having completing 5
years of sentence without committing any major jail offence or any
cognizable offence during the last 5 years. He further submits that as per
the reply also the case of the petitioner stands admitted by the
respondent.
6. Per contra, Mr. Ashok Kumar Sehrawat, DAG Haryana,
however submits that the petitioner is a habitual offender and the
competent authority having opined to be a threat of security does not
deserve to be granted relief of regular parole. Moreso, in the light of his
earlier conduct.
7. I have heard rival contentions of the parties and have
carefully gone through the records of the case.
8. In the impugned order dated, 13.03.2024, no reasoning has
been assigned apart from bald assertion that the petitioner does not
deserve parole for security reasons. There is no material discussed by the
competent authority to form such opinion. Apart therefrom, Para 5 of the
reply reads as under:-
"That, it is further submitted before this Hon'ble High Court
that the petitioner has remained absconded from parole for 07 Years 05
3 of 4
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:057647
CRWP-3180-2024 -4- 2024:PHHC:057647
Months and 07 Days and during the absconded period the petitioner
committed the cognizable offence punishable with imprisonment for a
period of seven years and case FIR No 217/2018 U/s 398,401 IPC & 25
A. Act P.S Rajendera Park, Gurugram has been registered against the
petitioner.
However, he has undergone the mandatory period of imprisonment
as per section 6(3) of the Parole Act 2022, which is as under :-
"6(3) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (1), a
hardcore convicted prisoner, who has not been awarded death penalty or
life imprisonment till natural life and has completed five years of his
sentence (including maximum two years under trial period), without
committing any major jail offence or any cognizable offence during the
last five years, shall be entitled for emergency parole or regular parole
or furlough at par with convicted prisoners. Such period of five years
shall be counted from the date of his latest offence or act which falls
under the category of hardcore convicted prisoner:
Provided that a hardcore convicted prisoner who has been
sentenced for imprisonment till natural life shall be eligible for
emergency parole or regular parole at par with convicted prisoners only
after completion of seven years of imprisonment after conviction:
Provided further that if the hardcore convicted prisoner so
released temporarily violates any condition of parole or furlough or
commits any cognizable offence, he shall be debarred from such release
for next three years.
9. In view of the above, respondents admit that the petitioner
would be covered by Section 6(3) of the Parole Act, 2022 as he has
undergone mandatory period of imprisonment.
10. In view of the aforesaid facts, the impguned order dated
13.03.2024 is hereby set aside. Competent authorities are directed to
decide the application afresh within a period of 10 days.
11. Disposed off accordingly.
25-04-2024 (PANKAJ JAIN)
spn
JUDGE
Whether speaking/reasoned Yes
Whether Reportable : No
4 of 4
