Subhash Chander vs State of Haryana

Ujagar Singh, J.

InspectorGeneral (Prisons), Haryana, at Manimajra ordered the petitioner to be released on furlough for two weeks vide his letter No. 35G1/G5/R92R479 dated 13th May, 1987. On receipt of the said letter the petitioner was informed to furnish bonds of two sureties in the amount of Rs. 10,000/ each to the satisfaction of District Magistrate Sonepat, and get himself released for two weeks. This information was sent vide Superintendent, Central Jail, Ambala letter No. 3652, dated 19.5.1987.

Counsel for the petitioner states that he furnished two sureties before the District Magistrate who required verification of the same by the Tehsildar, which was complied with. After verification, when the same were sent back to the District Magistrate, the same were approved by him but later, on second thought, the District Magistrate passed the following order :

"I withdraw the approval for this furlough already given by me as the bail cannot be granted because of the strain on the Administration due to impending Assembly election in June, 1987."

A second attempt was made by the petitioner by putting up two sureties and inspite of verification by the Tehsildar, as was done earlier, the District Magistrate sent the same to the police for verification of the same.

The petitioner prays for availing himself of two weeks'' furlough as sanctioned by the Inspector General (Prisoners) Haryana. After the verification was made by the Tehsildar concerned and the sureties were found to be in order, the same were approved by the District Magistrate. Later on, the District Magistrate could withdraw the approval only on sufficient grounds, if any. The order for withdrawal of the approval does not mention any ground whatsoever, the only ground given being that there is strain on the Administration due to impending Assembly election in June, 1987. After the sureties were approved, the petitioner was only to be released from jail to enable him to enjoy his furlough only for two weeks. The Administration, if at all it felt any strain, had nothing to do by interfering with the furlough already granted to the petitioner. The District Magistrate was required to do this routine matter within the four corners of his official duties. The impending Assembly elections in June, 1987, was no ground to withdraw the approval already given to the request for the furlough. I am told that the Assembly elections ultimately took place on 17th June, 1987, and by then the petitioner would have even been back to jail had he been released on 27th May, 1987. The second action of the District Magistrate in once again sending the verification of the two sureties to the police was also not called for.

In view of the foregoing discussion, the petitioner is directed to be released on 15 days'' furlough on the basis of the sureties already approved to the District Magistrate on 27.5.1987, and withdrawal of the approval by him is quashed being illegal. The petitioner shall now be released from jail to enable him to enjoy himself two weeks'' furlough commencing from the date of his release. He shall surrender on the expiry of the period of the furlough. He is not required to furnish new sureties to the District Magistrate as the earlier sureties remain verified by the Tehsildar which is sufficient. It is further clarified that the mater need not now be put up before the District Magistrate and the petitioner shall be straight away released by the Superintendent, Central Jail, Rohtak.