Case BriefsHigh Courts

Punjab and Haryana High Court: Kuldip Singh, J. quashed the order of the lower court on the ground that there was no finding to prove that the petitioner will create any law and order in the society.

A petition was made against the order passed by the District Magistrate in which prayer of the petitioner for grant of parole was declined.

The State in its reply bought in the notice to the court that parole was rejected on the ground that petitioner was involved in offence under NDPS Act and in the event of release on parole he might create law and order problem in society. It was also submitted that the address of the convict was verified and he was not the habitual offender.

The Court opined that as the report shows that the petitioner was granted the parole three times earlier and he surrendered within time, there was no ground to reject the present petition. It was further held that when it is stated that he is not a habitual offender, the apprehension of the State that he will create law and order problem is without any material and basis. Thus the impugned order was quashed and the petitioner was ordered to be released on parole to meet his family and attend domestic affairs. [Hans Raj v. UT, Chandigarh, 2019 SCC OnLine P&H 1309, decided on 25-07-2019]

Case BriefsHigh Courts

Madras High Court: G.K. ILanthiraiyan, J. directed the Superintendent of Police, Krishnagiri and the Inspector of police, Bargur Police Station (respondents) to issue necessary permission to the petitioner for conducting of a cultural programme in connection with Sri Mariamman Temple Festival.

Petitioner had made a representation to respondents seeking permission to conduct cultural programme as mentioned above but the same was not considered. As such, the petitioner represented by S. Mayinlnathan filed the present criminal original petition. T. Shunmugarajeswaran, Government Advocate appearing for the respondents submitted that there was a likelihood of arising of a law and order problem.

The High Court observed, “mere apprehension cannot be a ground to reject the representation. There is absolutely no material before this Court to hold that there will be a law and order problem in the event of permission being granted.” In such view of the matter, the petition was allowed and the permission to conduct a cultural programme in Sri Mariamman Temple Festival at Kappalvadi Village was granted subject to certain conditions mentioned by the Court. [K. Venkatesh Prasad v. Superintendent of Police, 2019 SCC OnLine Mad 453, dated 04-02-2019]