Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Surendra Kumar vs State on 26 August, 2020
Author: Sandeep Mehta
Bench: Sandeep Mehta
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
D.B. Criminal Writ Petition No. 292/2020
Surendra Kumar S/o Shri Hari Ram, Aged About 24 Years, At
Present Lodged In Central Jail , Bikaner Through His Mother Smt
Bhanwari Devi W/o Shri Hari Ram , Age About 55 Years , R/o
Village Chailasi Ps Sadar , Sikar Distt. Sikar
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State, Through Secretary Of Home Department Jaipur
(Raj)
2. The District Collector, Sikar
3. The Superintendent , Central Jail, Bikaner
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. K.R. Bhati
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Farzand Ali, AAG-cum-GA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP MEHTA
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE KUMARI PRABHA SHARMA Judgment 26/08/2020 Heard. Perused the material available on record. The convict-petitioner has filed the instant parole writ petition seeking to assail the adverse recommendations drawn up in the meeting of the District Parole Advisory Committee, Sikar held on 03.07.2020 whereby the petitioner's application for first parole of twenty days has been rejected. The Committee rejected the application of the petitioner on the ground that as per the report of the District Superintendent of Police Sikar, the convict- petitioner has been convicted in a murder case and if he is released on parole, the society will loose its faith towards the legal (Downloaded on 26/08/2020 at 08:48:59 PM) (2 of 3) [CRLW-292/2020] system and that the victim party might feel offended by the convict's release on parole. It is pertinent to note here that contrary to the police report, the Social Justice and Empowerment Department, Sikar has submitted a report to the effect that if the convict-petitioner is released on parole, no adverse affect shall be caused to the peace and tranquility of the society.
We find that the reasons assigned in the adverse recommendations for denying parole to the petitioner are absolutely mechanical, vague and lackadaisical. The concerned parole committee shall educate itself on the aspect that merely on the ground that the offence is heinous or that the victim party might feel offended, that by itself cannot be a reason to deny parole to a convict. This concept has been considered and affirmed by this Court in numerous judgments. The view taken in the adverse recommendations is also contrary to the Rajasthan Prisoners Release on Parole Rules, 1958. The Parole Rules, 1958 have been promulgated to provide the convicts a window of visiting their families and so that they can be re-integrated into the social fabric.
Thus, considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case and the fact that Social Welfare Department and Superintendent Central Jail, Bikaner has given positive report in favour of the convict-petitioner, we are inclined to extend indulgence of first parole to the convict-petitioner.
Accordingly, the parole writ petition is hereby allowed. The adverse recommendations drawn in the meeting of the District Parole Advisory Committee, Sikar held on 03.07.2020 is quashed and struck down qua the convict-petitioner and it is ordered that the convict Surendra Kumar S/o Shri Hari Ram shall be released (Downloaded on 26/08/2020 at 08:48:59 PM) (3 of 3) [CRLW-292/2020] on first parole of twenty days upon his furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of Superintendent Central, Jail, Bikaner on the usual terms and conditions. The Superintendent, Central Jail, Bikaner 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 term of parole shall be computed from the date of his actual release. (KUMARI PRABHA SHARMA),J (SANDEEP MEHTA),J 22-/Sudhir Asopa/-
(Downloaded on 26/08/2020 at 08:48:59 PM) Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)