Document Fragment View
Fragment Information
Showing contexts for: parole rules in Babu Ram @ Babu vs State And Ors on 1 October, 2018Matching Fragments
It is true that as per Rule 3, application is required from the Petitioner for his release on parole and Rule 3 is very relevant and is required to be quoted here. Rule 3 of the Rules of 1958 is as under:
"3. Application for release on parole.- A prisoner sentenced to imprisonment for not less than one year may, subject to exceptionally good behaviour, be allowed by the Superintendent of Jail, in which he is confined, to submit application for parole in triplicate in Form 1."
21. Rule 3 of the Rules of 1958 says that application for release on parole is required from the prisoner who has been sentenced to imprisonment for not less than one year. But Rule 9 is required to be given effect to by the jail authorities by keeping in mind that the prisoner is in disability and is under the care of the said authorities. The aim and object behind framing the Rules of 1958 are very important because of simple reason that after the life, the liberty is most important right of a person and if one is entitled to or can be given liberty even for short period, then such liberty cannot depend upon procedural formalities of moving application and seeking liberty, particularly when liberty has been taken away of such person (though, in accordance with law) or is under control of some authority who has lawful right to restrict the liberty of a person as in the case, after conviction of a person. It is more important because of the reason that in spite of the fact that persons are lodged in prison because they (4 of 7) [CRLW-241/2018] committed crime and some of the crimes may be of very heinous nature and the law framers were conscious of the fact that some offenders may not be lightly released on parole, yet they made provision in the Rules of 1958 by enacting Rule 14 by using liberal language for release of offenders who have committed heinous crimes and provided that the classes of prisoners mentioned in Sub-clauses (a) to (d) ordinarily will not be eligible for release on parole. The law framers have not prescribed total ban on the release on parole of prisoners who have committed heinous offences referred under Clauses (a) to (d) under Rule 14. This also suggests towards the intention of the law framers that even the penal law should be reformative in nature so as to reform the person and to achieve the object of law to punish the offender with clear aim and object to reform the offender so that he can adjust and settle in the society again and may be given more opportunities to interact with his family members and society." 2.5 Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that permanent parole in accordance with the aforesaid precedent law cannot be rejected only on the ground that the petitioner has not availed the third parole.
3.1 Learned counsel for the respondents has, however, relied upon Rules 9 & 10 of the Rajasthan Prisoners Release on Parole Rules, 1958, which read as under :
"9. A prisoner, who has completed with remission, if any, one- fourth of his sentence and subject to good conduct in the Jail, may be released on Ist parole for 20 days including days of journey to home and back, and for 30 days on 2nd parole provided his behaviour has been good during Ist parole and for 40 days on third parole provided his behaviour has been good during the second parole. If during the third parole also the prisoner has behaved well and his character has been exceedingly well and if the prisoner's conduct has been such that he is not likely to relapse into crime, his case may be recommended to the Government through the State Committee for permanent release on parole on such conditions as deemed fit by the Superintendent Jail and the District Magistrate concerned; the Chief condition among them being that if the prisoner while on parole commits any offence or abets, directly or indirectly, commission of any offence, he has to undergo the unexpired portion of the sentence in addition to any sentence imposed upon him by reason of such an offence. In case the permanent release on parole is rejected, the prisoner will be eligible for release on parole (5 of 7) [CRLW-241/2018] for 40 days every year subject to the same conditions for the remaining period of his sentence.
10. Once in eleven months. - No second and subsequent release on parole shall be made unless eleven months have elapsed from the date of the expiry of the period of release on parole immediately preceding."
3.2 Learned counsel for the respondents submit that Rule 9 requires that a prisoner, who has completed one-fourth of his sentence, he becomes entitled to Ist parole for 20 days, 2 nd parole for 30 days and third parole for 40 days. If the prisoner has behaved well in each of the paroles and his character has been exceedingly well, his case may be recommended to the Government through the State Committee for permanent release on parole. Learned counsel for the respondents, however, submits that since the petitioner has not been granted third parole under Rule 9, he is not entitled to be considered for permanent parole.