Present In Open Air Camp Sanganer, Jaipur) v. The State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary Home

Judgment

1. The State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary Home, Secretariat, Jaipur.

2. The District Parole Advisory Committee, Through Its Chairman, District Magistrate, Jaipur.

3. The Additional District Magistrate, Jaipur City (South), Jaipur, Rajasthan.

4. Superintendent Central Jail, Jaipur. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s)

: Mr. Pallav Jhalani with Mr. Heeralal Prajapati for Mr. Anshuman Saxena For Respondent(s) : Mr. Rajesh Choudhary, GA-cum-AAG HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AVNEESH JHINGAN HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BHUWAN GOYAL 22/07/2025 Order

1. The convict-prisoner has preferred this criminal writ petition (parole) seeking release on first regular parole for a period of 20 days.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that earlier, convict-prisoner was released on first parole of 20 days vide order dated 17.05.2019 passed in D.B. Criminal Writ Petition No.196/2019 subjecting to his furnishing a personal bond in the [2025:RJ-JP:27231-DB] (2 of 5) [CRLW-413/2025] sum of Rs. 2,00,000/- with two sound and solvent sureties of Rs.1,00,000/- each. But convict-prisoner could not avail first parole as he was not in a position to furnish sureties and the prayer for waiver of furnishing sureties was also rejected by this Court. He also submits that convict-prisoner has remained in custody for a period of more than fourteen and a half years including remission. His jail conduct as per the report of the Superintendent, Central Jail, Jaipur is satisfactory. He also submits that the parole application of the convict-prisoner has been rejected by the District Parole Advisory Committee on the ground that District Magistrate, Hathras has given adverse report against the convict-prisoner. The contention is that there was neither any foundation for the adverse report nor justification in rejecting his parole application.

3. Mr. Rajesh Choudhary, learned GA-cum-AAG opposes the petition and contends that District Magistrate, Hathras has not recommended case of the prisoner for release on parole on the ground that in the enquiry made by the Superintendent of Police, Hathras, sister of convict-prisoner raised an apprehension of fear, terror and unrest amongst the general public if he is released on parole.

4. We have considered the contentions.

5. The decision to grant or deny parole should be based on eligibility criteria outlined in the Rajasthan Prisoners Release on Parole Rules, 1958 (for short ‘Rules of 1958’). Rule 9 of the Rules of 1958 is reproduced below:- “9. Parole period - A prisoner, who has completed with remission, if any, [one-fourth] of his sentence [2025:RJ-JP:27231-DB] (3 of 5) [CRLW-413/2025] and subject to good conduct in the Jail, may be released on 1st 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 the 1st 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 cases the permanent release on parole is rejected the prisoner will be eligible for release on parole for 40 days every year subject to the same conditions for the remaining period of his sentence. Provided the cases of prisoners who have been sentenced to imprisonment for life, for an offence for which death penalty is one of the punishments provided by law or who have been sentenced to death but this sentence has been commuted under section 433 of Code of Criminal Procedure into one of life imprisonment shall not be placed before the State Committee for permanent release on parole unless he has served 14 years of imprisonment excluding remission but including the period of detention passed during enquiry, investigation or trial. Such prisoners may be released on parole for 40 days every year for the remaining period of their sentence subject to the conditions stated above.”

6. Rule 9 of the Rules of 1958 mandates that on completion of one-fourth of sentence and subject to the good conduct in jail, the prisoner may be released on first, second and third parole being of 20, 30 & 40 days respectively. The additional condition in the [2025:RJ-JP:27231-DB] (4 of 5) [CRLW-413/2025] subsequent parole is that behavior of prisoner during the earlier parole had remained good and the conduct does not indicate relapse into crime, the case is to be recommended.

7. Admittedly, convict-prisoner was earlier released on first parole but on account of his inability to furnish sureties, he could not avail benefit of first parole. As per rules, parole can be denied on the ground of unsatisfactory jail conduct. It is not the case of the respondents that jail conduct of the prisoner is unsatisfactory and he is otherwise not entitled to be released on parole under the Parole Rules.

8. Considering the fact that the convict-prisoner has remained in custody for a period of more than fourteen and a half years; jail conduct of the convict-prisoner is satisfactory and no documentary evidence in support of adverse police report has been placed on record to deny prayer for grant of first regular parole to the prisoner, we deem it proper to allow present writ petition (parole) and set aside the order/recommendation dated 28.02.2025 qua the petitioner.

9. The Criminal Writ Petition (Parole) is accordingly, allowed. The order/recommendation dated 28.02.2025 of the District Parole Advisory Committee qua the convict-prisoner is quashed. The Jail Authorities are directed to release the convict-prisoner on first regular parole for a period of 20 days on furnishing of his personal bonds of Rs.2,00,000/- with two sound and solvent sureties of Rs. 1,00,000/- each to the satisfaction of the Superintendent, Central Jail, Jaipur with the stipulation that he shall surrender himself before the Jail Authorities on the expiry of [2025:RJ-JP:27231-DB] (5 of 5) [CRLW-413/2025] parole period and shall maintain peace and tranquility during parole period.

10. In case of failure to surrender by stipulated date, the Jail Authorities shall proceed in accordance with Law.

11. The Registrar (Judicial) is directed to send a copy of this order to Superintendent, Central Jail, Jaipur by fax today itself for necessary compliance. (BHUWAN GOYAL),J (AVNEESH JHINGAN),J INDER/9