Punjab & Haryana High Court Directs Release Of 412 Prisoners On Interim Bail, Flags Pendency Of Pre-Mature Release Applications For Over 2 Yrs

Observing that State authorities have categorised them as "second class  citizen" by failing to process premature release applications of eligible prisoners, the Punjab & Haryana High Court has directed to release 412 inmates of Punjab prisons. 

Justice Harpreet Singh Brar said, "Regrettably, in spite of the specific directions issued by this Court in Pohlu @ Polu Ram (supra) as well as Pawan Kumar vs. D.K. Tiwari and another...the inmates awaiting consideration of their premature release application are not being released on interim bail. Shockingly, some applications are pending for almost two years."

The Court said that it is left with no other option but to direct the concerned Chief Judicial Magistrates to release such prisoners on interim bail within 02 weeks of receipt of a certified copy of this order.

Justice Brar quoted Nelson Mandela, “To deny people their human rights is to challenge their very humanity” and said, "The fundamental rights, which includes right to liberty and dignity, have been granted by the Constitution, and not the State for them to be withdrawn in this undignified fashion."

The Court took note of the report submitted by Deputy Inspector General of Prisons, Punjab office of Additional Director General of Police (Prisons), Punjab in compliance of Court's direction, which revealed that, "a total of 412 different jails cases of pre-mature release of convicts lodged in different jails in the State of Punjab are pending consideration."

Perusing the record, the bench opined that "the policy instituted by the State for premature release is equally applicable to all convicts and denial to be considered under the same directly impacts their fundamental rights as enshrined under Articles 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India."

Once eligible to be considered for premature release according to the applicable policy, the State cannot deny them this concession without recording due reasons for the same. In fact, the State is duty bound to act fairly and proceed according to the policy formulated by it in a manner that does not discriminate between similarly situated persons in absence of an intelligible differentia, it added.

State Can't Cherry Pick To Allow Premature Release

The Court further said that non-arbitrariness is a facet in Article 14 of the Constitution of India and the State and all its agencies are required to abide by it. "The State cannot indulge in cherry picking and only provide the concession of premature release to a select few out of the pool of similarly situated convicts and such approach is highly inequities,"

Justice Brar highlighted that 412 inmates had applied for pre-mature release till December 10, 2024 and the conspicuous failure on part of the State agencies to process the applications of such a considerable number of inmates is a deeply concerning.

"In doing so, the applicants-inmates have been subjected to further incarceration when they may be eligible to be released. Such an undisciplined approach is symptomatic of the culture of apathy that has developed on the subject of rights and well being of convicts," it added.

The Court observed that, in denying them their legal right to be considered under a policy duly devised by the State for a specific purpose, the authorities have essentially categorized them as second-class citizens. The administration cannot truly comprehend the value of liberty as perceived by a prisoner, who lives its absence every single day.

 It also opined that treating their applications for grant of premature release as trivial and elective, appears to be a measure of further unjustified retribution which is expressly forbidden by Article 20(3) of the Constitution.

 In the light of the above, the Court directed "to circulate a copy of this order as well as a copy of the list of all 412 inmates, available as Annexure.."to all the Chief Judicial Magistrates in whose jurisdiction they fall.

While listing the matter for August 06, the Court asked the "the State of Haryana and the Union Territory of Chandigarh are directed to furnish an affidavit containing the details pertaining to pending cases of premature release from the last two years i.e. 2023-2024 and 2024-25,withing 08 weeks."

Title: MALKIT SINGH AND OTHERS VS. STATE OF PUNJAB

Rishabh Singla, AAG, appeared for the Punjab.

Click here to read/download the order