Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Munna Singh vs State Of Rajasthan ... on 10 October, 2023
Bench: Arun Bhansali, Rajendra Prakash Soni
[2023:RJ-JD:34057-DB]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
D.B. Criminal Writ Petition No. 1415/2023
Munna Singh S/o Shri Sudama Singh, Aged About 34 Years, At
Present Lodged in Open Air Camp Jaisalmer, through His Brother
Shri Bulat Singh S/o Sudama Singh Aged About 38 Years R/o
House No. 84 Char Dukan Second Phase Basni Ps Basni Dist.
Jodhpur.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State of Rajasthan, Department of Home Rajasthan, Jaipur.
2. The District Collector, Jodhpur.
3. The Deputy Superintendent, District Jail, Jaisalmer.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Kalu Ram Bhati with
Mr. S.D. Chavariya.
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Anil Joshi, GA-cum-AAG with
Mr. Rajat Chhaparwal and Mr. Pallav
Sharma.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN BHANSALI
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJENDRA PRAKASH SONI Order 10/10/2023
1. This petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking a direction to the respondents to release him on permanent parole on personal bond pursuant to the order dated 31.7.2023 (Annex.1), whereby the petitioner has been granted permanent parole, however, stipulation has been made that petitioner would be required to furnish two sureties of Rs.50,000/- each along with his personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/-.
2. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is not in a position to furnish two sureties as required, which is resulting in his being denied permanent parole and, therefore, he may be permitted to be released on personal bond only.
(Downloaded on 12/11/2023 at 07:26:24 AM)
[2023:RJ-JD:34057-DB] (2 of 2) [CRLW-1415/2023]
3. A reply to the petition has been filed inter alia indicating that in the past, whenever the petitioner was released on parole, he has furnished sureties and no reason has been indicated as to why those who have earlier provided sureties are not prepared to provide sureties. However, it has been indicated that the conduct of the petitioner during earlier parole as well as in the prison, has been satisfactory.
4. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that though in the past when the petitioner went on parole, he was able to provide sureties as directed, in the changed circumstances, wherein, his friends who earlier provided the sureties are now not available, he is not in a position to provide sureties and on that count the permanent parole of the petitioner may not be refused.
5. In view of the above fact situation, where the petitioner has indicated that in the past he could provide the sureties from his friends, who are now not available and as the petitioner is being released on permanent parole, we are of the opinion that the petitioner in these peculiar circumstances can be released on personal bond.
6. Consequently, the petition filed by the petitioner is allowed. The order dated 31.7.2023 (Annex.1) is modified to the extent that petitioner be released on permanent parole on his furnishing personal bond only to the tune of Rs.50,000/-. Rest of the conditions of order dated 31.7.2023 (Annex.1) shall continue. (RAJENDRA PRAKASH SONI),J (ARUN BHANSALI),J 26-Sumit/-
(Downloaded on 12/11/2023 at 07:26:24 AM) Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)