Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur
Mahaveer Singh vs State (Home Department)Ors on 17 November, 2016
Author: Ajay Rastogi
Bench: Ajay Rastogi
(1)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR
------------------------------------------------------
D.B. Civil Writ Petition (Parole) No.9732/2016
Petitioner :-
Mahaveer Singh S/o Shri Ghasi Singh, by caste Rajput,
aged about 41 years, R/o Harigarh, Police Station
Khanpur, District Jhalawar (Raj.) (at present in Open
Air Jail, Tonk) through his younger brother Mahendra
Singh S/o Shri Ghasi Singh, aged about 32 years, R/o
Harigarh, Police Station Khanpur, District Jhalawar
(Raj.).
V E R S U S
Respondents :-
1. The State of Rajasthan through the Secretary Home,
Secretariat, Jaipur.
2. Deputy Secretary, Department of Home, Government of
Rajasthan, Government Secretariat, Jaipur.
3. The Prisoners Parole Advisory Committee (State
Committee) through its Chairman, Director General of
Prisons, Rajasthan.
4. Superintendent District Jail, Tonk.
Date of Order : 17.11.2016
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY RASTOGI
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA
Mr. Vishram Prajapati Adv. On behalf of
Mr. Anshuman Saxena Adv., for Petitioner.
Mr. Pankaj Sisodiya Asstt. GA for respondent.
ORDER
-----
Instant petition has been filed by the convict petitioner Mahaveer Singh S/o Ghasi Singh seeking permanent parole u/R 9 of the Rajasthan Prisoners Release on Parole Rules,1958 ("Rules,1958").
The convict petitioner is in judicial custody for almost more than 19 years and his jail conduct as per the nominal roll placed on record Annx.R/1 issued from the office of Superintendent, District Jail, Tonk is satisfactory. The petitioner was convicted for offence u/S 302 IPC & 3/25 of the Arms Act by learned (2) Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track) No.1, Jhalawar in Sessions Case No.20/2004 and sentenced to life imprisonment vide judgment dt.15-5-2004 and his conviction has attained finality after rejection of his Special Leave to Appeal by the Apex Court and it is not disputed that the convict petitioner has availed three regular paroles (I,II & III) u/R 9 of the Rules,1958, although while he availed first regular parole for a period of 20 days it has come on record that he surrendered at a later stage but this fact stands ruled out from the subsequent event which has taken place and it is not the case of the respondent that while availing second and third regular parole he either breached or violated any of the conditions of parole granted to him.
Under the orders of State Parole Advisory Committee he is presently lodged in Open Jail, Tonk as reveals from the order dt.5-8-2015 Annx.2 and his application for permanent parole came to be rejected by the State Parole Advisory Committee in its meeting held on 1.3.2016 which was communicated to him vide order dated 22.3.2016 on the premise that as he has escaped while availing first regular parole as such his case falls within the exception contemplated u/R 14(c) of the Rules 1958 & that is the sole defence of the respondent to support action of the authorities in rejecting his application seeking permanent parole to which he is otherwise entitled for under the law.
Counsel for petitioner placed reliance on the Division Bench judgment of this court in DB Civil Writ Petition (Parole) No.2394/2015 (Bhagga @ Bhagat Ram Vs. State of Raj. & Ors.) decided on 15.4.2015 and this Court after examining the scheme of Rules, 1958 & also taking note of the earlier precedent of this (3) Court observed as under:-
"Consequently, all these writ petitions are allowed and it is directed that:-
"(1) the cases of the petitioner/prisoners who have served requisite period of sentence and are eligible for consideration for release on permanent parole under the provisions of the Rules of 1958, their cases may be considered by the respondents and if they are found eligible for grant of permanent parole, they be released on permanent parole irrespective of the fact whether petitioners have availed the benefit of first, second and third parole or any of above paroles. This order has no application to the cases where any of the parole prayer has been rejected by the competent authority. Such person's prayer for release on permanent parole be considered on its own merit.
(2) In case prayer for permanent parole of any of the petitioners/prisoner is rejected on its merit after taking care of the observations made in this judgment then such petitioner's/prisoner's prayer for release on parole for 40 days, every year may be considered by the respondents on merit of each case.
(3) The respondents are directed to see that prisoners lodged in jail be made aware about the Rules of 1958 and about their right for release on first, second and third parole.
(4) The respondents are further directed to see that parole prayers may not be rejected on flimsy grounds for which the respondents' competent authority may look into the observations made above in this judgment as well as in earlier judgments delivered by the Courts and also should take care that ineligible person may not be released on paroles. The respondents are required to examine each individual case of prisoner and while doing so should look (4) into the judgment/order passed in the case of such individual to find out whether there is any order passed by the Court for serving of minimum actual sentence by such prisoner and also look into the fact whether while delivering judgment it has been observed that petitioner should not be released on parole at all.
(5) The respondent-State is directed to give benefit of Rajasthan Prisoner (Shortening of Sentence) Rules, 1958 to the eligible persons whenever the prisoners became eligible for the relief under the Rules of 1958 if after consideration of individual's case, the prisoner is found eligible for grant of benefit under the Rules.
(6) The respondents and in particular the Jail Authorities who are otherwise bound to maintain the record of the prisoner should carefully not only keep the record of the prisoners, but should make appropriate entries in the record of making the prisoners aware of the benefits for which they may be entitled to under the above parole rules and shortening of sentence rules.
(7) The copy of the order may be sent to the Principal Secretary, Home, Government of Rajasthan, Jaipur as well as Director General (Prisoner), who may in turn, issue appropriate instructions to the concerned jail authorities."
Apart from what has been observed by this Court in its order while disposing of writ Petition of which reference has been made dt.15.4.2015 the impediment which has been noticed by the State Parole Advisory Committee in its order dated 22.3.2016 may not be relevant for the reason that R.14(c) is an exception & holds a prisoner ineligible for grant of parole while his application being considered for parole u/R 9 of the Rules 1958 and it is not disputed as observed by (5) this Court that at the time of availing 2nd & 3rd regular parole he has neither breached nor violated conditions of parole granted to him and that being so the impediment if any stands washed away by virtue of his subsequent conduct and taking note of the fact that he is in judicial custody for about 19 years and there is no other impediment brought to our notice which may deprive him in seeking permanent parole under the Scheme of Rules 1958 and taking in totality of the matter we are of the view that rejection of his application seeking permanent parole prayed for is not sustainable and the convict petitioner deserves indulgence of this Court as prayed for.
Consequently the writ petition succeeds & is hereby allowed. The order dt.22.3.2016 qua petitioner stands quashed & set aside. We direct the concerned District Authority to release the convict petitioner Mahaveer Singh S/o Ghasi Singh on permanent parole, subject to furnishing his personal bond besides one surety of Rs.25,000/- to the satisfaction of the concerned District Magistrate, that apart shall also furnish an undertaking that in case during permanent parole, he commits any undesirable activity, he can be called upon to serve his remaining sentence, at the same time shall also maintain peace and tranquility during the parole period and will abide by any other condition imposed by the authority.
A copy of this order may be sent to the petitioner through concerned jail authority for necessary compliance.
(SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA), J. (AJAY RASTOGI),J.
VS Shekhawat Sr.P.A. (D9)