Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur
Manohar Lal S/O Late Shri Vishnu Prakash vs State Of Rajasthan on 24 August, 2022
Author: Birendra Kumar
Bench: Birendra Kumar
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Criminal Writ Petition No. 380/2022
Manohar Lal S/o Late Shri Vishnu Prakash, R/o Manganj Mohalla,
Masuda Road, Beawar, District Ajmer (Raj.) (At Present Confined
In Central Jail Ajmer) Through His Brother - Vipin S/o Late Shri
Vishnu Prakash, Aged About 26 Years, R/o Manganj Mohalla,
Masuda Road, Beawar, District Ajmer (Raj.)
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary, Department
Of Home, Govt. Secretariat, Jaipur.
2. The Director General Of Prisons, Directorate Prison,
Rajasthan, Jaipur.
3. The Superintendent, Central Jail, Ajmer.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Govind Prasad Rawat For Respondent(s) : Mr. Chandragupt Chopra, AGA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BIRENDRA KUMAR Order 24/08/2022 The petitioner is aggrieved by refusal of the prayer for transfer to open air camp. Petitioner is convict for offences under Sections 3/4, 5/6 and 29 of POCSO Act and is serving out his sentence.
A Division Bench of this court in Rajendra @ Goru Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. [DB Criminal Writ Petition No. 189/2022] considered identical issue whether a convict under the POCSO Act can be permitted to be transferred to open air camp. By order dated 13.07.2022, the court refused the prayer of petitioner and observed as follows:-
(Downloaded on 27/08/2022 at 12:04:38 AM)(2 of 2) [CRLW-380/2022] "Rule 3 of the Rules of 1972 postulates that the classes of prisoners, which have been narrated in sub- clauses of Rule 3 of the Rules, would ordinarily not be eligible for being sent to the Open Air Camp. The term 'ordinarily' has been interpreted by this Court in numerous decisions and it has been held that it does not stipulate an absolute prohibition on such a convict for being sent to the Open Air Camp.
However, we are of the definite opinion that while considering the cases of the restricted classes of prisoners as per Sub-clause of Rule 3, the word 'ordinarily' would definitely have to be considered keeping in mind the gravity of offences attributed to the convict. The Open Air Camp facility gives an opportunity to the convicts to be rehabilitated into the society because they can keep their families with them in the campus and they can even move out of the camp during the day time for earning their livelihood. If the prisoners, who have been convicted with the heinous offence under the POCSO Act, are sent to the open air camp, their presence would definitely create a fear in the mind of the families of the other inmates that their children would not be safe if such prisoners are allowed to stay in the open air camp and this could dead to a situation of strife. The convict himself would be at risk as a consequence.
Therefore, we are of the firm view that while considering the word 'ordinarily' even in a liberal sense, the authorities would definitely be justified in taking note of the nature and gravity of offences while considering the application submitted by a convict for being sent to the Open Air Camp more particularly for those who are convicted and sentenced under the POCSO Act and like offences."
Considering the binding ratio of this court, above prayer for transfer to open air camp is hereby refused.
Accordingly, instant petition stands dismissed.
(BIRENDRA KUMAR),J ashu /85 (Downloaded on 27/08/2022 at 12:04:38 AM) Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)