Amritpal Singh Moves Punjab & Haryana High Court Against State’s Refusal to Grant Parole for Winter Session of Parliament

Amritpal Singh, a sitting Member of Parliament, has approached the Punjab and Haryana High Court challenging the State’s refusal to grant him parole to attend the upcoming Winter Session of Parliament.

Singh, who is presently detained under the National Security Act (NSA), has filed a writ petition seeking a writ of certiorari to quash the State of Punjab’s order by which his application for temporary release/parole under Section 15 of the NSA was rejected. He has further sought a writ of mandamus directing the Union of India and the State of Punjab to permit his release on parole from December 1 to December 19, 2025, for the Winter Session of Parliament and to make appropriate arrangements to facilitate his personal attendance in the House.

Previously, the High Court had directed the Punjab Government to decide on Amritpal’s representation within seven days. Following the State’s rejection of his request for parole, he has now approached the High Court challenging the refusal.

Background of the Petition

Amritpal Singh is a resident of Punjab and an elected Member of Parliament from the Khadoor Sahib Parliamentary Constituency. In his petition, he states that he is currently lodged in Central Jail, Dibrugarh, Assam, and represents approximately 19 lakh constituents.

The petition sets out that he seeks to: “Represent the people of his Khadoor Sahib Constituency before the Parliament and also to highlight the various issues faced by people of his constituency in the true spirit of democracy and in consonance with the Constitution of India.”

The plea states that Amritpal Singh had earlier been granted parole to travel to Delhi for his oath-taking ceremony when he was sworn in as a Member of Parliament. The petition also relies on the Delhi High Court judgment in Abdul Rashid Sheikh v. NIA, where another Member of Parliament, who was in custody under the UAPA, was permitted to attend the Budget Session of Parliament.

Challenge to Continued Preventive Detention

Singh asserts that he is a peace-loving and law-abiding citizen, and contends that his continued preventive detention, now extending to nearly three years, has effectively become punitive in nature. He also invokes Article 101 of the Constitution of India, which provides that if a Member of Parliament is absent for a period of sixty days, the House may declare his seat vacant.

Cause Title: Amritpal Singh v. Union of India & Others