AVTAR SINGH versus STATE OF HARYANA AND ANR.

AVTAR SINGH versus STATE OF HARYANA AND ANR.

Sub-section (3) of Section 3 of the Haryana Good Conduct Prisoners (Temporary Release) Act, 1988, which excludes the parole period from counting towards the total sentence, is valid and not violative of Article 21. The Act creates valid classification between parole and furlough based on rational criteria; parole is for urgent personal issues and furlough is a reformative measure for good conduct. There is no discrimination or constitutional infraction.

Parties
Appellant/petitioner: Avtar Singh; Respondents: State of Haryana and Anr.
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
19 February 2002
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal and Writ Petition (criminal) / Supreme Court Appeal From Punjab and Haryana High Court; Challenge to Constitutional Validity of Statute
Outcome
Appeal and writ petition dismissed.
Legal Topics
Parole, Furlough, Temporary Release of Prisoners, Article 21, Constitutional Validity, Classification Under Article 14
Constitutional Law Criminal Law Prison Law Parole Furlough Temporary Release of Prisoners Article 21 Constitutional Validity +1 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Avtar Singh

Appellant/petitioner

State of Haryana and Anr.

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal and Writ Petition (criminal) / Supreme Court Appeal From Punjab and Haryana High Court; Challenge to Constitutional Validity of Statute

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the period of parole availed by a convict should be included in the total period of imprisonment undergone by him under the Haryana Good Conduct Prisoners (Temporary Release) Act, 1988
  2. 2 Whether sub-section (3) of Section 3 of the Act is arbitrary, illegal, ultra vires and unconstitutional, specifically as violative of Articles 14 and 21

Ratio Decidendi

Sub-section (3) of Section 3 of the Haryana Good Conduct Prisoners (Temporary Release) Act, 1988, which excludes the parole period from counting towards the total sentence, is valid and not violative of Article 21. The Act creates valid classification between parole and furlough based on rational criteria; parole is for urgent personal issues and furlough is a reformative measure for good conduct. There is no discrimination or constitutional infraction.

Court Disposition

Appeal and writ petition dismissed.

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed.
  • Writ petition dismissed.