Honble SAXENA, J. - D.B. Civil Haheas Corpus Petition No. 5828/93 has been filed by Smt. Sushila Kanwar w/e life convict Shyam Singh, whereas, D.B. Crt. Misc. Parole Petition No. 155/94 has been filed by Shyam Singh himself. Since the relief sought in the afore-mentioned petitions is same, these are being decided together by a common order. (2). The undisputed facts are that petitioner Shyam Singh was admitted in jail as an under-trial prisoner on 3.6.1986. He was convicted by the learned Sessions Judge, Jodhpur for the offence under Section 302 I.P.C and sentenced to life imprisonment. The appeal against his conviction is pending in this Court. The convict Shyam Singh as per report of the Superintendent of Central Jail has already served out sentence of eight years, one month and twelve days as on 6th Dec, 1993. The State in its reply has also admitted that the conduct of petitioner Shyam Singh in the Jail has been found normally satisfactory. This is also not in dispute that convict Shyam Singh was granted one emergency parole for 7 days from 5.11.91 to 11.11.91 due to the illnesss of his mother Smt. Mengi Bai. Besides, he was further granted parole by this court in D.B. Cr. Misc. Parole Petition No. 24/91 w.e.f. 1.2.91 to 28 .2.91 which was extended upto 29.03.1991. Smt. Sushila has prayed that her elder daughter Kumari Nitu is suffering from epilepsy for several years and that her house had fallen down in rainy season in the year 1993 and as such Shyam Singh be released on parole for a period of 120 days. (3). The State has opposed this petition on the ground that petitioners parole application was considered and the same was rejected by the Collector, Jodhpur. The District Advisory Committee has also rejected Shyam Singhs parole application in its meeting dated 28th Dec, 1993 on the ground that if he is released on parole then there is every likelihood that he may quarrel with persons of locality and he may prove dangerous to the member of the family of the deceased and that one of the co- accused namely Pappu, who was released on parole, has absconded. (4). In Parole petition No. 155/94, Shyam Singh has prayed that since his mother Smt. Mangi Bai is seriously ill he may be released on parole for a period of 15 days. (5). (4). In Parole petition No. 155/94, Shyam Singh has prayed that since his mother Smt. Mangi Bai is seriously ill he may be released on parole for a period of 15 days. (5). Certificates regarding the ailment of Kumari Nitu and Smt. Mangi Bai and a photograph showing dilapidated condition of Shyam Singhs house have been filed in support of these petitions. (6). We have heard Mr. Manish Shishodia, the learned Amicus Curiae and Dr. S.S. Bhandawat, the learned Additional Advocate General at length and carefully perused the relevant record. (7). It has not been denied on behalf of the respondent that Shyam Singhs daughter Kumari Nitu and his mother Smt. Mangi Bai are not suffering from serious ailments. The only ground on which these petitions have been opposed, is that the Superintendent Police has given an adverse report against convict Shyam Singh. The State in its reply has specifically admitted that the conduct and behaviour of convict Shyam Singh in Jail has been found normally satisfactory. Convict Shyam Singh was released on parole twice in the year 1991 and during that period his conduct has not been reported unsatisfactory or hazardous to society. On the other hand, after expiry of the periods of parole, he had surrendered to the Jail authorities. (8). The aim for the grant of parole to a convict is to encourage his good conduct. The object of the parole is that prisoners should not feel that they are not the members of the society and they should be allowed to mix up with their kith and kins. The mere fact that there is an apprehension of breach of peace in case the prisoner is released on parole, is not a valid ground for declining the parole because proper bonds can be procured from him for keeping peace and maintain good behaviour during the period of release. (9). The daughter and mother of convict Shyam Singh are suffering from serious ailments and there is no other adult male member to look after them. Convict Shyam Singh has already under gone more than eight years sentence. (10). In Iqbal Singh vs. State of Punjab (1), it has been held that simply because some of the persons earlier released on parole did not surrender before the jail authorities, is not a sufficient ground for denying concession of furlough to a convict. Convict Shyam Singh has already under gone more than eight years sentence. (10). In Iqbal Singh vs. State of Punjab (1), it has been held that simply because some of the persons earlier released on parole did not surrender before the jail authorities, is not a sufficient ground for denying concession of furlough to a convict. Therefore, petitioner Shyam Singh, who is admittedly entitled for parole, should not denied this concession, simply because one of the co-accused namely Pappu did not surrender after he was released on bail. (11). Therefore, keeping in view all the facts and circumstances of the case and also taking a humanitarian consideration, we partly allow these petitions and order that convict Shyam Singh be released on parole for a period of fifteen days from the date of his release, provided he executes his personal bond for an amount of Rs. 40,000/- (Rs. forty thousand) and furnishes two sound and substantial sureties for an amount of Rs. 20,000/- each to the satisfaction of the learned Sessions Judge, Jodhpur to the effect that after the expiry of the aforesaid parole period he shalll surrender himself before the Superintendent, Central Jail, Jodhpur and that during the said period he shall keep peace and the of good behaviour. The Superintendent, Central Jail, Jodhpur, is directed that in case the petitioner does not surrender himself after the expiry of the aforesaid parole period then he will immediately inform the learned Sessions Judge, Jodhpur, who in his turn will take necessary action u/sec. 446 Cr. P.C. and issue a non-bailable warrant for the arrest of convict Shyam Singh for ensuring his attendance. A copy of this order be sent to Collector, Jodhpur and Superintendent of Police, Jodhpur for information and necessary action.