Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur
Prakash vs State Of Raj And Ors on 16 November, 2017
Author: Mohammad Rafiq
Bench: Mohammad Rafiq
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT
JAIPUR
D.B. Civil Writ Petition (Parole) No.19087 / 2017
Prakash, Son of Shri Kanaram, by Caste Meghwal, Aged About 38
Years, Resident of Shesham, Police Station Losal, District Sikar
(Rajasthan). Through His Nephew Vinod, Son of Shri Moolchand,
Aged About 21 Years, Resident of Near Bus Stand,
Raghunathgarh, District Sikar, (Rajasthan); (Petitioner is Presently
Confined At Central Jail, Bikaner)
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State of Rajasthan Through Secretary to the Government,
Department of Home, Secretariat, Jaipur.
2. District Parole Advisory Committee Through Its Chairman,
District Collector, Sikar.
3. The Superintendent Central Jail, Bikaner.
----Respondents
_____________________________________________________ For Petitioner(s) : Shri Anil Kumar For Respondent(s) : Shri R.S. Raghav, P.P. _____________________________________________________ HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD RAFIQ HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KAILASH CHANDRA SHARMA Order 16/11/2017 This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner, who was convicted for offence u/s.302/34 and 397/34 IPC by the trial court vide judgement dated 6.6.2017 and was sentenced to life imprisonment. Petitioner has filed the appeal against the order before this Court, which is still pending.
It is contended that since petitioner completed more than five years of his sentence, he is certainly eligible to have his case considered for regular first parole under Rule 9 of the Rajasthan (2 of 3) [CW-19087/2017] Prisons (Release on Parole) Rules, 1958 for a period of 20 days. It is submitted that the conduct of the petitioner during his custody in jail is satisfactory. However, his application was rejected by Advisory Committee on the basis of adverse report of Social Welfare Officer and Superintendent, Central Jail, Bikaner, who have mechanically stated that if petitioner is enlarged on parole, there is possibility of breach of peace and any untoward incident taking place. There appears to be no foundation for such an assumption. The object of parole is to enable the convict to stay in touch with his family and other members of the society so that after completion of sentence, he rejoins the main stream of the society as a reform citizen.
Learned Public Prosecutor opposed the writ petition. Having regard to the facts aforestated, the writ petition is allowed. Order dated 5.10.2017 passed by the District Parole Advisory Committee qua the petitioner is quashed and set aside. It is directed that the petitioner namely; Prakash S/o Shri Kanaram shall be released on first regular parole from the Central Jail, District Bikaner for a period of 20 days from the date of his release upon his furnishing one surety bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties in the sum of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of respondent no.3-the Superintendent, Central Jail, District Bikaner, with the stipulation that he shall surrender before the jail authorities immediately after expiry of period of 20 days. In case, the petitioner fails to surrender immediately after expiry of stipulated period of 20 days, the jail authorities shall immediately inform the concerned Magistrate for procuring his (3 of 3) [CW-19087/2017] arrest. It will be open for the concerned jail Superintendent to put any other condition, as per Rules, to secure presence of the petitioner.
(KAILASH CHANDRA SHARMA)J. (MOHAMMAD RAFIQ)J. RS/7