Punjab-Haryana High Court
Satpal vs State Of Haryana And Ors on 24 October, 2024
Author: Anoop Chitkara
Bench: Anoop Chitkara
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:139709
260 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
CRWP-3782-2024
Date of Decision: 24.10.2024
SATPAL ... PETITIONER
VS.
STATE OF HARYANA AND ORS .. RESPONDENTS
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP CHITKARA
Present: Mr.Rahul Deswal, Advocate
for the petitioner.
Mr. Aashish Bishnoi, DAG, Haryana.
*****
ANOOP CHITKARA , J.(ORAL)
Seeking quashing of order dated 29.11.2023 (Annexure P-5)
passed by respondent No.3, whereby prayer for grant of premature release
has been wrongly rejected/deferred for 03 years without considering the
fact that the petitioner fulfils the conditions mentioned in the premature
release policy dated 12.04.2002 (Annexure P-3) and without considering the
fact that the same is in-violation of judgment passed by this Court in CRWP-
8232-2022 titled as Pohlu @ Pohlu Ram Vs. State of Haryana and others,
decided on 05.02.2024.
2. Counsel for the petitioner seeks immediate interim release of
the petitioner based on the order of Hon'ble the Supreme Court in Ramji
Dubey and others Vs. The State of Uttar Pradesh and another which reads
as follows:-
"Since the petitioners have been in jail for over 20 years,
they shall be released on ad interim bail subject to the
terms and conditions to be imposed by the Trial Court to
its satisfaction."
3. Counsel for the petitioner submits that his case is rejected
illegally and as per policy, he is entitled for release. He be permitted to file
fresh representation, and the concerned authority be directed to decided
the same without any delay.
1 of 2
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:139709
4. On the other hand, State counsel opposes the petition and
refer following paragraphs of reply:-
"After considering the recommendations of the
State Level Committee, the Govt. passed the order dated
29.11.2023 that the case for premature release of life
convict Satpal son of Dharam Pal be deferred for three
years and his case will be re-considered after three years,
if otherwise found eligible. Copy of the Govt. order dated
29.11.2023 is already annexed as Annexure P-5 with the
writ petition.
In view of the above order, it is clear that the State
Level Committee probably wanted to further watch the
conduct of the petitioner so that the case of the
petitioner will be reconsidered for his premature release.
Therefore, the case of the petitioner has been rightly
deferred."
5. In view of the submissions made by both the parties, and
taking into all the facts, it would be better in the interest of justice, if
petitioner files a fresh representation taking all his grounds within 15 days.
If such representation is filed, respondent-State shall take decision on the
same within one month from the date of the receipt of such representation.
Petition stands disposed of with the aforesaid observations. It is clarified
that if the representation is not decided within time frame, in that case, the
petitioner is at liberty to initiate contempt proceedings as well as he will be
at liberty to ask for interim release. All pending applications, if any, also
stand disposed of.
24.10.2024 (ANOOP CHITKARA )
smriti JUDGE
Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No
Whether Reportable : Yes/No
2 of 2
