Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Khetaram @ Bhotiya vs State on 26 April, 2022
Author: Dinesh Mehta
Bench: Dinesh Mehta
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Criminal Writ Petition No. 366/2020 Khetaram @ Bhotiya, S/o Somaram, By Caste Jogi, R/o Kantal, Police Thana Pindwara, District Sirohi (Raj.). (At Present Lodged At Central Jail Jodhpur).
----Petitioner Versus
1. State, Through Secretary, Home Department, Jaipur.
2. The District Collector, Sirohi.
3. Superintendent, Central Jail, Jodhpur.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ashok Panwar
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Mahipal Bishnoi, PP
JUSTICE DINESH MEHTA
Order
26/04/2022
1. The present petition has been registered pursuant to a letter written by the petitioner Khetaram @ Bhotiya.
2. On 31.03.2022, this Court had appointed Mr. Ashok Panwar as Amicus Curiae to pursue the cause of the petitioner.
3. Mr. Panwar, learned counsel for the petitioner, submitted that the petitioner has been convicted for the offences under Sections 7 and 8 of the POCSO Act, so also Section 363 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced for a period of five years' imprisonment.
4. He submits that out of the total period of five years, the petitioner has served a sentence of about 3 years and 6 months and yet he has not been given benefit of first parole. (Downloaded on 26/04/2022 at 09:03:30 PM)
(2 of 3) [CRLW-366/2020]
5. Challenging the decision dated 10.02.2022 of the Parole Advisory Committee, learned counsel submitted that the petitioner's parole has been rejected only under the apprehension that the petitioner would pressurize the other party for compromise and there is a likelihood of law and order situation being disturbed.
6. Learned counsel argued that since the petitioner had already been convicted, the reason of pressurising for compromise, cited by the Parole Advisory Committee, is without application of mind.
7. Mr. Bishnoi, learned Public Prosecutor submitted that under the new provisions, the convict under the POCSO Act cannot be given benefit of parole.
8. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and upon perusal of the material available on record, this Court is of the considered opinion that the petitioner is entitled for first parole of 20 days, as per the provisions of Rajasthan Prisoners Release on Parole Rules, 1958. So far as embargo on release of convict under the POCSO Act is concerned, the same is given under the new Rules, which have come into force on 29.06.2021, whereas the petitioner was convicted on 31.10.2019 and, therefore, the petitioner cannot be denied parole in the light of the new Rules of 2021.
9. So far as the reason, given by the Parole Advisory Committee that the petitioner would pursue a compromise is unsustainable as the petitioner has already been convicted. The other apprehension or likelihood of law and order situation being disturbed, too is based on surmises and hence, is unsustainable. So is the stipulation that nobody would come forward for furnishing bail bond and surety.
(Downloaded on 26/04/2022 at 09:03:30 PM)
(3 of 3) [CRLW-366/2020]
10. The impugned order dated 10.02.2020 of the Parole Advisory Committee is hereby quashed and set aside. Petitioner's application for parole of 20 days is allowed. It is directed that convict-petitioner Khetaram @ Bhotiya S/o Shri Somaram be released on first parole of 20 days upon his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.20,000/- with two sound and solvent sureties of Rs.10,000/- each to the satisfaction of Superintendent, Central Jail, Jodhpur on the usual terms and conditions.
11. The Superintendent, Central Jail, Jodhpur shall be at liberty to impose other adequate and reasonable conditions to ensure return of the convict to the custody after availing the parole. The period of parole shall commence from the date of his release on parole.
12. The Registry is directed to send a certified copy of the order instant to Superintendent, Central Jail, Jodhpur for doing the needful.
(DINESH MEHTA),J 105-skm/-
(Downloaded on 26/04/2022 at 09:03:30 PM) Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)