Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Raju @ Rajkumar vs State Of Rajasthan on 1 September, 2022
Bench: Vijay Bishnoi, Farjand Ali
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
D.B. Criminal Writ Petition No. 314/2022
Raju @ Rajkumar S/o Shri Purna Ram, Aged About 50 Years, At
Present Lodged In Central Jail, Bikaner Through His Brother Shri
Shanwarmal S/o Shri Purna Ram, Age About 60 Years, R/o Ward
No. 2, Sardarsahar, District Churu.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Secretary Of Home Dept.
Jaipur.
2. The Director General Jail, Jaipur.
3. The District Collector, Churu.
4. The Superintendent, Central Jail, Bikaner.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Kalu Ram Bhati
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Anil Joshi, GA-cum-AAG assisted
by Mr. Pallav Sharma
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAY BISHNOI
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FARJAND ALI Order 01/09/2022 The application, preferred by the petitioner seeking permanent parole, has been rejected by the State Level Parole Committee on the ground that he has been convicted for the offence under Section 460 IPC and sentenced for ten years' rigorous imprisonment and as per Sub-rule 2(b) of Rule 16 of the Rajasthan Prisoner Release on Parole Rules, 2021 (hereinafter to be referred as 'the Rules of 2021'), the petitioner cannot be granted benefit of permanent parole.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that the petitioner was sentenced for life imprisonment for the offence under Section 302 IPC and sentenced for ten years rigorous imprisonment for the offence under Section 460 of IPC. It is (Downloaded on 01/09/2022 at 08:48:35 PM) (2 of 2) [CRLW-314/2022] argued that up to 18.8.2022, he has served out total sentence of 17 years, 4 months and 3 days, therefore, he has already under gone sentence of 10 years for the offence under Section 460 IPC and as per the law laid down by this Court in DB Criminal Writ Petition No.264/2022 (Hadmant Singh @ Hadmata vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors.) decided on 22.07.2022, the petitioner is entitled for the benefit of permanent parole.
Learned Public Prosecutor has submitted that the word 'conviction' is mentioned in Sub-rule 2(b) of Rule 16 of the Rules of 2021, and even if the petitioner has served out the sentence of 10 years for the offence under Section 460 IPC, he cannot be granted benefit of permanent parole.
Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record.
This Court in Hadmant Singh's case (supra) has observed that if the prisoner has already served out the total imprisonment for the offence, which is particularly prohibited in Sub-rule 2(b) of Rule 16 of the Rules of 2021, there is no impediment for releasing him on parole even with reference to the Rules of 2021.
In view of the above, this parole writ petition is allowed and the respondents are directed to release the petitioner - Raju @ Rajkumar S/o Shri Purna Ram on permanent parole on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- along with two sureties of Rs.50,000/- each to the satisfaction of the Superintendent, Central Jail, Bikaner.
(FARJAND ALI),J (VIJAY BISHNOI),J
18-Arun/-
(Downloaded on 01/09/2022 at 08:48:35 PM)
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)