Madhya Pradesh High Court
Sunil Sharma vs The State Of M.P. on 2 December, 2019
Author: Vivek Rusia
Bench: Vivek Rusia
-1- WP No.25508/2019
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH,
BENCH AT INDORE
WRIT PETITION NO.25508/2019
(Sunil Sharma s/o late Durgaprasad Sharma vs. State of M.P
& others)
02.12.2019 (INDORE):
Shri Ashutosh Sharma, learned counsel for the
petitioner.
Heard.
Petitioner has filed the present petition being aggrieved
by the order dated 07.10.2019 whereby the I.G, Jail &
Reformative Services, Bhopal has granted permission to
release respondent No.3 on parole for 14 days subject to
fulfilling the conditions mentioned therein.
According to the petitioner the respondent No.3 committed the murder of his father for which he has been convicted and sentenced to undergo life imprisonment. At present he is in Central Jail, Ujjain. Respondent No.3 applied for consideration of his case for release on parole. The petitioner has already made a complaint to the SHO, Kalapipal that the respondent No.1 is planning to release the respondent No.3 on parole and if he is released on parole his life may be in danger as the respondent No.3 has made up his mind to commit his murder and his family members may try to take possession of his land. On 03.01.2019 the petitioner also made a complaint to the Superintendent of Police, Shajapur praying that the application for release of -2- WP No.25508/2019 respondent No.3 on parole be not considered as he apprehends that the respondent No.3 will commit his murder.
By order dated 07.10.2019 the Jail headquarter has granted permission to release the respondent No.3 on parole.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that till today the respondent No.3 has not availed the benefit of parole and he is still in jail, therefore, the respondents No.1 & 2 be directed to consider his representation.
The application for release of convicted prisoner on parole is liable to be considered under section 31-A of the Prisoners (Madhya Pradesh Amendment) Act, 1985 which has been inserted as "Part VI-A" by the State in the Prisoners Act, 1900. Under this chapter the prisoner who has been sentenced to a term of imprisonment of not less than three years may submit an application for release on parole subject to fulfilling certain conditions. In such process no right has been given to the victim as well as the family members of the deceased to submit any objection. The prisoners have been given a statutory right for consideration of their application for parole, hence the petitioner has no right to submit a representation in order to object the parole. In absence of any statutory right in favour of the petitioner, no direction can be given to the respondents No.1 & 2 to consider his representation.
So far the apprehension of the petitioner that after the release of the respondent No.3 on parole he may commit his murder, the petitioner may approach the police authorities in -3- WP No.25508/2019 order to seek his protection, therefore, only on the basis of apprehension no writ can be issued in favour of the petitioner. The State of M.P has also framed the Rules in exercise of powers conferred under section 13(1) of the Prisoners Act called the Madhya Pradesh Prisoner's Leave Rules, 1989. A complete procedure has been provided in the said Rules. Under Rule 4-C during the calendar year a prisoner shall be eligible for a maximum leave of 42 days. There is a provision of emergency leave for marriage, death etc. As per rule 9 there is a condition for release on leave and as per sub rule (2) during his leave he shall neither commit any crime nor involve in any such act that may have its bearing on public interest. There is also a provision of penalty for breach of condition of parole as well as overstaying after release on parole, therefore, no case for interference is made out in the present petition. Accordingly, the petition is dismissed.
(VIVEK RUSIA) JUDGE Digitally signed by Hari Kumar Nair hk/ Date: 2019.12.06 11:25:54 +05'30'