JUDGMENT M.M.S. Bedi, J.:- Aggrieved by the dismissal of his application for grant of parole vide order dated 11.4.2017 on the ground that he is likely to engage himself in the business of smuggling, the present writ petition is filed by the petitioner. 2. Notice was issued to the Advocate General, Punjab regarding the basis of the apprehensions mentioned in the order for refusal of parole as the panchayatnama indicated that Sarpanch was even ready to give surety regarding the petitioner not indulging in any illegal activity. The matter was required to be reconsidered by the District Magistrate, Amritsar, to furnish a report whether on the surety of Sarpanch and Member of Panchayat, the parole could be given to the petitioner. 3. State counsel has informed that on surety of Sarpanch and Member of Panchayat, the State has no objection to the grant of parole to the petitioner if the above said sureties are ready to furnish guarantee for the good conduct of the petitioner. 4. In view of the said statement, this petition is allowed and it is directed that the petitioner, subject to his eligibility, would be granted concession of parole as per law on the condition that he would not indulge in any activity under NDPS Act for which assurances have been given by the Sarpanch and Panchayat Member of the village. 5. Necessary order in this context would be passed by the District Magisrate, Amritsar within a period of one month.