Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Sampat Singh vs State Of Rajasthan ... on 13 March, 2026
Author: Farjand Ali
Bench: Farjand Ali
[2026:RJ-JD:12006-DB]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
D.B. Criminal Writ Petition No. 317/2026
Sampat Singh S/o Panna Singh, Aged About 46 Years, At Present
Lodged In Central Jail , Ajmer Through His Wife Leela W/o Shri
Sampat Singh 44Yrs R/o Govliya Kekri Ps Bhinay Ajmer
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Department Of Home Jaipur
2. The Director General Jail, Jaipur
3. The District Collector, Ajmer
4. The Superintendent, Central Jail Ajmer
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Kalu Ram Bhati
Mr. Swapan Chouhan
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Deepak Choudhary, GA-cum-AAG
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FARJAND ALI
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP SHAH Order Reportable-
13/03/2026
1. The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner- convict seeking grant of permanent parole under the Rajasthan Prisoners (Release on Parole) Rules, 1958 and assailing the decision of the District Parole Advisory Committee whereby his application for parole came to be rejected.
(Uploaded on 18/03/2026 at 06:00:03 PM) (Downloaded on 18/03/2026 at 08:31:28 PM) [2026:RJ-JD:12006-DB] (2 of 8) [CRLW-317/2026]
2. As per the averments made in the writ petition, the petitioner applied for permanent parole before the respondent authorities in earlier round of litigation by way of filing a D.B. Civil Writ Petition No.14630/2015 and vide order dated 08.02.2016 he was released on permanent parole by Superintendent of Jail, Ajmer.
3. After his release on 02.05.2016, he committed an offence for which a Case No.21/2017, bearing FIR No.198/2016 got registered against him at Police Station Masuda, District Ajmer for having accusation of penal provision of NDPS Act and 380 and 457 of IPC. He was arrested and subjected to trial and after a rigorous trial, he was convicted and sentenced vide judgment dated 17.09.2024. He was convicted for committing offence under Section 380 of IPC and sentenced to suffer five years imprisonment and eight years for offence under Section 457 of IPC.It is not disputed that he has undergone and suffered the sentence as directed by the learned trial court. In this background of the case, he again moved a petition for his permanent parole. A reply to the writ petition has been preferred on behalf of the State of Rajasthan specifically mentioning that till 30.01.2026, the petitioner has served 28 years 10 months and 8 days imprisonment. It is averred that while taking a liberal approach, the petitioner was released on permanent parole on 09.02.2016, however, he made breach of the conditions and committed offence during the period of parole and in (Uploaded on 18/03/2026 at 06:00:03 PM) (Downloaded on 18/03/2026 at 08:31:28 PM) [2026:RJ-JD:12006-DB] (3 of 8) [CRLW-317/2026] that criminal case also he was found guilty and these circumstances are sufficient to dis-entitle him to get benefit of parole. The earlier order of permanent parole granted in the year 2016 was revoked vide order dated 15.03.2022.
4. We have heard learned counsel appearing for the respective parties and have carefully perused the record as well as the attendant facts and circumstances of the case. It is indeed true that the petitioner, while earlier extended the concession of permanent parole, had misused the liberty so granted in his favour and had committed an offence during the subsistence of the said parole, which ultimately culminated in his conviction. Nevertheless, it cannot be lost sight of that the petitioner has, as on date, undergone incarceration for an exceptionally long duration of nearly twenty-nine years. The breach of the conditions of parole admittedly occurred in the year 2016 and a considerable period of almost a decade has elapsed thereafter. The philosophy underlying the parole system is essentially reformative and rehabilitative in nature and not merely punitive. In these circumstances, this Court is of the considered view that the mere fact that the petitioner had earlier abused the concession of parole cannot, by itself, lead to an irrebuttable presumption that he would necessarily repeat such conduct in future or that the possibility of his reformation has been completely foreclosed. Having regard to the prolonged period of incarceration already undergone (Uploaded on 18/03/2026 at 06:00:03 PM) (Downloaded on 18/03/2026 at 08:31:28 PM) [2026:RJ-JD:12006-DB] (4 of 8) [CRLW-317/2026] and the passage of considerable time since the earlier breach, the petitioner deserves to be afforded an opportunity to demonstrate his reformation and reintegrate into the social mainstream.
5. In the opinion of this Court, the ends of justice would be adequately subserved if the petitioner is granted a limited opportunity to establish that he is capable of maintaining lawful conduct outside the prison environment. Such release, for a short duration in the first instance, would operate as a probationary test of his conduct and behaviour. In other words, the petitioner may initially be released for a brief period so that his conduct during such period may be objectively assessed by the authorities. If during the said period he maintains good behaviour, resides peacefully in society and returns to the prison authorities within the stipulated time without committing any breach of the conditions imposed upon him, the competent authority may thereafter consider extending the duration of his parole in a progressive manner. Subject to continued satisfactory conduct and the manifestation of genuine signs of reformation, the petitioner's claim for permanent parole may thereafter be considered in accordance with law. In this backdrop, this Court is not inclined, at this stage, to grant the relief of permanent parole as prayed for by the petitioner and deems it appropriate to extend to him the benefit of release in accordance with the mechanism contemplated (Uploaded on 18/03/2026 at 06:00:03 PM) (Downloaded on 18/03/2026 at 08:31:28 PM) [2026:RJ-JD:12006-DB] (5 of 8) [CRLW-317/2026] under Rule 20 of the Rajasthan Prisoners (Release on Parole) Rules, 2021.
6. Accordingly, while this Court is not persuaded to accede to the prayer for grant of permanent parole at this juncture, it considers it appropriate, in the peculiar facts of the case and keeping in view the reformative object of the parole jurisprudence, to direct that the petitioner be considered for release in terms of Rule 20 of the Rajasthan Prisoners (Release on Parole) Rules, 2021 (hereinafter referred to as "the Rules of 2021"). The said Rule specifically provides the statutory framework governing cases where a prisoner has previously breached the conditions of parole or overstayed the sanctioned period of release. The provision contemplates a calibrated and cautious approach by prescribing that such prisoner ordinarily shall not be released on parole for a specified period and thereafter, subject to satisfactory conduct and the satisfaction of the Superintendent of Jail concerned that the prisoner is unlikely to commit any further breach, the prisoner may be granted parole for a limited duration in a phased and incremental manner. The Rule further envisages that in the first instance the prisoner may be released for a period of seven days, excluding the days of journey to and from his residence, followed by a period of fifteen days during the second parole and thirty days during the third parole, provided his conduct during the earlier periods of release remains satisfactory. The Rule (Uploaded on 18/03/2026 at 06:00:03 PM) (Downloaded on 18/03/2026 at 08:31:28 PM) [2026:RJ-JD:12006-DB] (6 of 8) [CRLW-317/2026] simultaneously incorporates a stringent safeguard by stipulating that in the event of any further breach or overstay of parole conditions, the prisoner shall be permanently disentitled from the concession of parole. For ready reference, Rule 20 of the Rules of 2021 is reproduced hereinbelow.-
"20. Punishment for breach of conditions of Parole. In addition to punishment specified in the Act, the following punishments may be awarded to the prisoners for over staying their sanctioned parole period or for breach of any other conditions laid down, namely:-
(a) Prisoner should not be let off on parole in future at least two years and after two years if the Superintendent of Jail is fully satisfied that Prisoner shall not commit any breach of condition in future, the prisoner may be released on the recommendation of the Superintendent of Jail concerned, the period of release on parole shall be seven days excluding days of journey to home and back. The period of next parole shall be fifteen days in the second parole and thirty days in the third parole, if prisoner has behaved well during the previous parole period.
(b) If the prisoner again over-stays or commits any breach of the conditions of the parole, prisoner shall be permanently debarred from the concession of release on parole.
7. The issue relating to grant of parole to a prisoner who had earlier absconded while on parole has also been considered by a Division Bench of this Court in Deva v. State of Rajasthan (D.B. Criminal Writ Petition No.179/2020), wherein the Court observed that even in such circumstances (Uploaded on 18/03/2026 at 06:00:03 PM) (Downloaded on 18/03/2026 at 08:31:28 PM) [2026:RJ-JD:12006-DB] (7 of 8) [CRLW-317/2026] an opportunity may be extended to the prisoner so as to enable him to reintegrate into society, subject to appropriate safeguards.
8. In view of the overall facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the view that to achieve the object of parole and to give a further opportunity to the petitioner to make review, remorse or repentance of the crime and sin he committed, a further opportunity for rehabilitation to go in mainstream of society ought to have been given. The satisfactory conduct reported in jail and the reformative objective underlying the parole system, this Court is of the opinion that the petitioner deserves to be granted one opportunity of parole, subject to strict conditions.
9. Consequently, the writ petition is allowed. The petitioner- convict Sampat Singh S/o Panna Singh shall be released on parole for a period of seven days from the date of his actual release (excluding days of journey to home and back), provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- along with one solvent surety of Rs.50,000/- to the satisfaction of the Superintendent, Central Jail concerned.
10. The Superintendent, Central Jail shall be at liberty to impose appropriate and reasonable conditions to ensure that the petitioner maintains peace and good behaviour during (Uploaded on 18/03/2026 at 06:00:03 PM) (Downloaded on 18/03/2026 at 08:31:28 PM) [2026:RJ-JD:12006-DB] (8 of 8) [CRLW-317/2026] the period of parole and surrenders back to the jail authorities immediately upon expiry of the parole period.
(SANDEEP SHAH),J (FARJAND ALI),J
22-chhavi/-
(Uploaded on 18/03/2026 at 06:00:03 PM)
(Downloaded on 18/03/2026 at 08:31:28 PM)
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)