VAIDYA, J. ( 1 ) RULE. Mr. R. P. Solanki, the learned A. P. P. waives service of the rule. Heard the learned Advocates. 1. Petitioner-Valjibhai Becharbhai Koli, who happens to be cousin brother of the prisoner-Shamji Chanabhai, has by this petition under Arts. 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, moved this Court challenging the impugned order dated 27-1-1993 passed by the District Magistrate, Jamnagar, whereby an application to release the prisoner on parole for 40 days on the ground of marriage of his younger brother - Pravin Chanabhai came to be rejected. The petitioner has also prayed for two reliefs, viz. , (i) to quash and set aside the impugned order; and (ii) to grant parole leave to the prisoner as prayed for. In support of this prayer for parole petitioner has also produced kankotri - marriage invitation card on the record. ( 2 ) MR. M. D. Raval, learned Advocate appearing for the petitioner while challenging the impugned order submitted that the District Magistrate has committed serious and an obvious error in rejecting the parole leave application on the queer reasoning that the ground of marriage applied in support of the said application was not proper. Making good this submission, mr. Raval, further invited our attention to the Remark-sheet issued by the Jail Authorities which was earlier produced on record in Special criminal Application No. 1580 of 1992 for the purposes of establishing clean conduct record of the prisoner. On perusal of the same, it appears that by this time, prisoner in all has enjoyed parole leave for 65 days and furlough leave once. Mr. Raval further submitted that neither in Jail nor when prisoner was released on parole and furlough leave, any untoward incident has taken place resulting into breach of Jail discipline or breach of peace outside. Not only that but the prisoner has all the time surrendered to the jail Authorities in time On the basis of the aforesaid record of the prisoner. Mr. Raval finally urged that looking to the satisfactory law-abiding conduct of the prisoner inside as well as outside the Jail, the District Magistrate ought to have released prisoner on parole leave to celebrate the marriage ceremony of his real younger brother- ( 3 ) MR. R, P. Solanki, the learned A P. P. appearing for the respondents has not been able to controvert the above submissions of Mr. R, P. Solanki, the learned A P. P. appearing for the respondents has not been able to controvert the above submissions of Mr. Raval which is supported by the Jail record itself. ( 4 ) HAVING heard the learned Advocates for the respective parties and after perusing the Jail record, we feel quite strange as to how indeed the District magistrate could have observed that the ground in question, namely, to attend the marriage of real brother given in support of the parole leave application was not proper. One can quite understand if there is something serious by way of allegation namely. (i) serious misconduct in Jail, and/or (ii) likelihood of the prisoner absconding in the event of his temporary release on parole or furlough, and/or (iii) adverse police opinion against the prisoner - based on some relevant acceptable material clearly indicating that on temporary release of prisoner, he was likely to create problem of the breach of peace and the law and order situation. This indeed is not the case here as amply demonstrated by the Remark-sheet produced on record. Thus, when the Jail record itself certify that there is nothing adverse against the prisoner which may possibly endanger the public peace and law and order situation or that the prisoner was likely to commit the same or similar offences, etc. , etc. , this Court feels that not to grant parole leave on such genuine ground of marriage of brother/ sister would be simply unjust and improper. As a matter of fact, this Court is of the opinion that such occasional parole leave applications on some genuine grounds of marriage and or death of family members, (unless the record of the prisoner is such which disentitles him from such parole leave even) should ordinarily be granted, as in very nature of things human gestures on the part of the authorities may also help in bringing about neutralising the bitterness and harshness in the heart of the prisoners and their family members towards the opponent, law and the law enforcing authorities. As against this, not to grant parole leave on such occasions may, in a given case, further frustrate and embitter the prisoner which in turn may not only react into washing out whatever little trace of humanity that in the heart he might be having, but he may also come out of the Jail with no respect for the law, law enforcing agency and love for the society. It is under these circumstances that we may reemphasise that while deciding such matters of parole/furlough leave, first of all the authorities concerned must bear in mind the overall social interest of protecting it from the serious breaches of law and order, and if after doing the same, the prisoners record is found to be self-evident enough that of peace-loving and law-abinding, then in such cases on any reasonable ground, such as marriage of brother or sister, etc. , the same should be favourably considered with the sense of compassion and pity towards the prisoner. Thus, while discharging the administrative duty with all firmness, the sense of compassion and pity towards the prisoner should not be lost sight of as that is also one of the important factors by which the administration can command respect for law and towards itself. ( 5 ) IN the result, this petition is allowed. Prisoner-Shamjibhai Chanabhai is ordered to be released on parole for 7 days from tomorrow i. e. , 2 9/01/1993 on usual terms and conditions. Rule made absolute. .