In Brief
A life convict seeking parole for house repair construction filed a writ petition claiming good conduct and family hardship. However, the court found he had been categorized as a 'hardcore prisoner' under the Haryana Act due to two life convictions and therefore could not apply under the standard parole section; he had to follow a separate procedure. Additionally, the petitioner falsely claimed he was a first offender and had absconded from previous parole periods, making him untrustworthy. The court dismissed the petition, holding he was not a suitable parole candidate, and issued directions on procedural timelines for parole application processing.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.