Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
(Mukadar Ali vs State Of Rajasthan ) on 27 May, 2015
Author: Govind Mathur
Bench: Govind Mathur
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
AT JODHPUR.
***
D.B. CIVIL WRIT (PAROLE ) PETITION NO.4729/2015 (MUKADAR ALI V/S STATE OF RAJASTHAN ) *** DATE OF ORDER 27.05.2015 HON'BLE MR. GOVIND MATHUR,J HON'BLE MISS JAISHREE THAKUR ,J By Post.
Mr.S.K.Vyas, Government Advocate.
A letter addressed to this court by the convict-prisoner has been treated as petition for writ. The petitioner on being convicted for the offences punishable under section 302/34, 201 of Indian Penal Code was sentenced to life term imprisonment with a fine of Rs.7000/-. He has already served sentence for 11 years, 09 months and 29 days including Jail and State remissions.
The District Parole Advisory Committee, Hanumangarh in its meeting held on 25.02.2015 denied 30 days second regular parole to the petitioner on the count that his release on parole shall adverse affect piece and tranquillity. It is also mentioned that the house of the convict-prisoner is just opposite to the house of the victim and therefore, there is an apprehension of danger to the life of the convict-prisoner also. The convict-prisoner availed first regular parole in the year 2012, at that time, he was shifted to some other place then the place allowed to stay while availing parole was changed.
2
We have considered the reasons given by the District Parole Advisory Committee to deny parole to the petitioner. The reasons given are not founded on any material and the same are quite usual as every person who is facing conviction has such eventualities. It is well settled that the concept of parole is introduced in criminal justice delivery system to bring the criminal in regular stream of the society by his rehabilitation, annual parole is a little effort in this regard. Statutory right given to avail regular parole cannot be frustrated by illfounded and usual reasons. The District Parole Advisory committee is having right to reject parole but only arriving at such conclusion in no manner shall serve object of the Rajasthan Prisoners Release on Parole Rules, 1958. Other eventuality like endanger to the life of the convict-prisoner is required to be met by the administration by providing adequate security.
In view of whatever stated above, we are inclined to grant this petition. Accordingly, the same is allowed and the respondents are directed to release the petitioner to avail 30 days second regular parole provided he furnishes two sureties of Rs.25000/- each and a personal bond of the same amount to the satisfaction of the Superintendent, Central Jail, Bikaner. The Superintendent Central Jail, Bikaner while releasing the petitioner on parole shall be at liberty to impose other adequate and reasonable conditions to ensure his return to the State custody after availing the parole. The Registry of this court is directed to send a certified copy of this order to the Superintendent, Central Jail, Bikaner with a specific direction to 3 convey decision of this court to the convict-prisoner within a period of three days from the date of receipt of the order.
[JAISHREE THAKUR], J. [GOVIND MATHUR], J. Anil Singh