Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur
Hanuman Prasad vs State (Inspector General Prison)Ors on 3 March, 2017
Author: Ajay Rastogi
Bench: Ajay Rastogi
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT
JAIPUR
D.B. Civil Writ Petition (Parole) No. 620 / 2017
Hanuman Prasad S/o Sh. Budhram @ Udharam, B/c Jangid, R/o
Dukiyo Ka Bas, Chanderpur P/s Mandawa, District-Jhunjhunu
(Raj.)
(At Present Confined in Central Jail Bikaner)
Through His Nephew : - Jai Singh S/o Sh. Surender, Age About 22
Years, B/c Jangid, Dukiyo Ka Bas, Chanderpura P/s Mandawa,
District- Jhunjhunu (Raj.)
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State of Rajasthan Through Inspector General, Prison, Jaipur.
2. The District Parole Advisory Committee Through the District
Magistrate, Jhunjhunu.
3. The Superintendent, Central Jail, Bikaner.
----Respondents
_____________________________________________________ For Petitioner(s) : Sh. B.R. Choudhary Adv. For Respondent(s) : Sh. B.N. Sandu, GA-cum-AAG. _____________________________________________________ HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY RASTOGI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAY KUMAR VYAS Order 03/03/2017 The convict-petitioner Hanuman Prasad S/o Budhram @ Udharam has preferred instant petition u/R 9 of Rajasthan Prisoners Release on Parole Rules,1958 for grant of second regular parole of 30 days.
The petitioner on being convicted for offence u/S 450, 302, 376(2)(g), 392, 397, 243, 316 IPC in Sessions Case No.04/2012 by Additional Sessions Judge No-2, Jhunjhunu vide judgment dt.24-9-2013, is serving life sentence in Central Jail, Bikaner and the D.B. Criminal Appeal No.775/2013 which he preferred against judgment of conviction & sentence awarded by the learned trial Judge is pending in this Court.
(2 of 3) [CW-620/2017] Counsel for petitioner submits that the petitioner being eligible filed application seeking second regular parole u/R 9 of the Rules,1958 and the social welfare department recommended case of the petitioner for grant of parole prayed for but taking note of the adverse police report, the application submitted by the petitioner seeking second regular parole came to be rejected by the District Parole Advisory Committee in its meeting held on 13- 12-2016 but there is no tangible evidence on record in support thereof and that apart jail conduct of the convict petitioner is satisfactory and it is not the case of the respondents that the petitioner has breached either of the conditions in availing first regular parole.
After considering the submissions made by counsel for the parties and the fact that conduct of convict-petitioner in jail is satisfactory which is the pre-condition contemplated u/R 9 of the Rules,1958 and in the facts & circumstances, we consider it appropriate to grant the convict-petitioner the benefit of second regular parole to which he is entitled for under the Scheme of Rules, 1958. Consequently, writ petition stands allowed and recommendations of the committee in its meeting held on 13- 12-2016 qua petitioner stands quashed. The Superintendent, Central Jail, Bikaner is directed to release petitioner (Hanuman Prasad S/o Budhram @ Udharam) on second parole, if not availed of, for 30 days including days of journey to home & back from the date of his release on furnishing his personal bond besides one surety of Rs.25,000/- to the satisfaction of jail authority with the stipulation that he shall surrender himself and (3 of 3) [CW-620/2017] return back to the Central Jail, Bikaner on expiry of 30 days (supra) to be notified by jail authority and shall maintain peace & tranquility during parole period and in addition to it he shall further report during parole on each Sunday at 11 am at concerned police station and that report be furnished to the Superintendent, Central Jail, Bikaner. In case of failure to surrender by petitioner on stipulated date, the jail authority shall proceed in accordance with law.
A copy of this order be sent to the petitioner through jail authority for compliance. No costs.
(VIJAY KUMAR VYAS)J. (AJAY RASTOGI)J. Dheeraj/25