Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

1. This writ petition has been registered on a letter of convict Om Prakash Resident of village Kherampura Police Station Adampur District-Hissar (Haryana). He was arrested in September, 1995. He was tried on the charge for offence under Section 302 I.P.C. Learned Sessions Judge, Jalore by judgment dated 29.1.1999 convicted him for offence under Section 302 I.P.C. and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life. He is presently lodged in Central Jail, Bikaner. He has undergone a sentence of about six years. He submitted an application before the Superintendent, Central Jail, Bikaner for consideration of his case by Advisory Committee for release on parole. The District Magistrate obtained the police report from Superintendent of Police and Sub-Divisional Officer, Hissar. The Superintendent of Police has sent an adverse report stating that if he is released, tension may crop up in the village. The Sub-Divisional Officer has verified that the house of the applicant is required to be repaired. He has also verified that there is no other member in the family of the applicant to take care of their house. However, the District Magistrate has expressed that the power of release on parole is with the Director General of Prison under the Haryana Release on Parole Rules. The Superintendent, Central Jail, Bikaner has furnished the necessary information in prescribed proforma.

2. The application is opposed by Mr. Shambhoo Singh Rathore, learned counsel for the jail department on the ground that in view of Rule 14 Sub-rule (a) of the Rajasthan Prisoners Release on Parole Rules, 1958 (hereinafter referred to as 'Parole Rules') he cannot be released on parole. Elaborating the argument, it is submitted that a resident of outside the State of Rajasthan confined in jail in State of Rajasthan, falls in the category of Class of Prisoners who are ineligible for release on parole. Mr. Rathore in all fairness has brought in our notice an unreported judgment dated 27.7.2000 rendered in D.B. Criminal Petition No. 1818/2000 wherein this court has interpreted the word "ordinarily" employed in Rule 14 Sub-rule (a) and held that there is no total prohibition to release a prisoner on parole whose ordinary place of resident is outside the State of Rajasthan.

3. The State of Rajasthan in exercise of powers under Sub-section (6) of Section 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure has framed the rules known as Rajasthan Prisoners Release on Parole Rules, 1958. Thus, Rules have been amended from time to time. The parole has been defined under Section 2 Sub-clause (d) which means conditional enlargement of a prisoner from the jail. Clause (f) provides the constitution of Prisoners Parole Advisory Committee. Sub-clause (g) provides the District Parole Advisory Committed headed by the District Magistrate. Rule 3 provides for application for release on parole. Rule 9 provides period of parole. The prisoner who has completed with remission, if any, 1/4th of his sentence and subject to good conduct in the jail, may be released on first parole for 20 days, second parole for 30 days and third parole for 40 days on the condition that his behaviour has been good during the last parole. Rule 9-A authorise the Superintendent of Jail to grant a parole for a period of seven days subject to confirmation of Inspector General of Prisons. Such a power can be exercise by the Inspector General of Prisons for a period of 15 days. Rule 10 provides for a gap of 11 months to become eligible for next period. Rule 10-A makes the provision for release of a prisoner in emergent cases involved in humanitarian consideration viz (1) critical condition on account of illness of any close relations i.e. father, mother, wife, husband, children, brother or unmarried sister; (2) death of any such close relation; (3) serious damage to life or property from any natural calamity; and (4) marriage of a prisoner, his/her son or daughter or his/or brothers/sisters in case his/her parents are not alive. Rule 13 speaks that the grant of parole is regarded as occasion to encourage good conduct. This rule also speaks that parole cannot be claimed as a matter of right.

6. The problem posed is required to be considered from a wider prospective as it involves a human problem. We have observed in number of cases that State Authorities enters into a long correspondence with the Stale to which the prisoner belong and ultimately the result is that such prisoners are deprived of the benefit of provision of parole in comparison with the other local prisoners in the jail. The parole rules provides consideration of emergent cases involved in humanitarian considerations but it is confined only to the resident of State of Rajasthan as if there can be no emergent cases for the prisoners, who are residents of outside the State of Rajasthan.