Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur
Mohan S/O Shri Rameshwar vs State Of Rajasthan on 27 June, 2022
Bench: Pankaj Bhandari, Anoop Kumar Dhand
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
D.B. Criminal Writ Petition No. 122/2022
Mohan S/o Shri Rameshwar, Aged About 33 Years, R/o Peethas,
Police Station Kotri, Presently R/o Dhagdas, Police Station
Mangrop, District Bhilwara (Raj.) ( At Present Ashaye Filling
Station Petrol Pump Near Central Jail Jaipur)
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary Home,
Secretariat, Jaipur.
2. The District Parole Advisory Committee, Through Its
Chairman, District Magistrate, Jaipur.
3. Superintendent Central Jail, Jaipur.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Vishram Prajapati For Respondent(s) : Mr. N.S. Gurjar, AGA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PANKAJ BHANDARI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND Order 27/06/2022
1. Petitioner has preferred this Criminal Writ Petition with following prayer:-
"(a). to quash and set aside the order dated
02.02.2022 (Annexure-1) passed by the petitioner; to direct the non-petitioners to release the petitioner on third regular parole of 40 days;
(b). to call for the record from the non- petitioners pertaining to the present matter;
(c). to pass any other order which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the present facts and circumstances, in favour of the petitioner."
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been convicted for the offences under Sections 302/34 and 376/34 of IPC. He further submits that there is a bar (Downloaded on 25/12/2022 at 12:05:31 AM) (2 of 2) [CRLW-122/2022] under Section 16(2)(b) of Rajasthan Prisoners Release on Parole Rules, 2021 (for short 'Rules of 2021') but the same is not applicable as the petitioner has already under gone the sentence of ten years for the offence punishable under Section 376 IPC.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that in view of the above, the bar under Section 16(2)(b) of the Rules of 2021 is not applicable and petitioner is entitled to get benefit of permanent parole.
4. Per contra, learned Asst. Government Advocate has opposed the prayer advanced by counsel for the petitioner and submits that there is a specific bar under Section 16(2)(b) of Rules of 2021, hence, petitioner is not entitled to get the benefit of permanent parole as he has been convicted for the offence under Sections 302/34 and 376/34 of IPC.
5. We have considered the contentions.
6. It is not in dispute that the petitioner has been convicted for the offence under Section 376 IPC read with 34 IPC and sentenced to undergo life imprisonment and has also been sentenced for one year rigorous imprisonment for that offence. Bare perusal of the Rule 16(2)(b) of the Rules of 2021 clearly indicates that the petitioner is not eligible for release on permanent parole. In view of Rules 16(2)(b) of the Rules of 2021 and the validity of the Rule is not under challenge, the arguments advanced by counsel for the petitioner is misconceived.
7. This petition is thus devoid of merit and the same is accordingly, dismissed.
(ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J (PANKAJ BHANDARI),J CHANDAN /19 (Downloaded on 25/12/2022 at 12:05:31 AM) Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)