Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2005 DIGILAW 987 (RAJ)

Rais v. State

2005-04-04

HARBANS LAL, V.K.BALI

body2005
Judgment 1. The prayer made in this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is to enlarge the petitioner on parole for a period of 20 days as per the provision contained in Rule 9 of the Rajasthan Prisoners Release on Parole Rules, 1958. 2. It is clearly made out from the averments that petitioner was arrested on 22.04.1999 in connection with FIR No.178/1999. He is in judicial custody since 01.05.1999. He faced trial and was convicted for offence under Section 302, IPC and sentenced to life imprisonment vide order dated 29.06.2001. The appeal preferred by him along with his co-accused is said to be still pending in the Court. He applied for regular parole before the Superintendent of Jail in December, 2004 but was informed that since the period from 01.05.1999 to 29.06.2001 during which period he remained in jail has not been mentioned in the warrant sent by the trial Court therefore, no facility of parole can be granted. 3. Pursuant to the notice issued by this Court, the respondents have only mentioned in reply to the petition that the petitioner was convicted for life imprisonment by the learned trial Court but in the sentence warrant sent by the trial Court neither the period spent by the petitioner in the J.C. nor P.C. has been mentioned and as well as there is no specific mention with regard to entitlement of the petitioner for benefit of Section 428 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 by the petitioner in the application. The pleadings in the written statements appear to be evasive with regard to the period spent by the petitioner in jail. 4. We have heard learned Counsel for the parties and with their assistance examined the record of the case. 5. The contention of the petitioner that he is in custody since 01.05.1999 appears to be correct. In the appeal filed by him which is also listed before a co-ordinate Bench of this Court at Sr.No. 45, it is recorded that the petitioner has already undergone the sentence for a period of 5 years, 6 months and 9 days which as today would be more than 5 years and 10 months. There is no specific denial to the averments made in the application with regard to period already spent by the petitioner in jail. 6. There is no specific denial to the averments made in the application with regard to period already spent by the petitioner in jail. 6. We are of the view that the convict-petitioner is entitled to set off the sentence to the extent of the period already undergone by him under Section 428, CrPC. The petitioner appears thus to have qualified for parole as per the provisions contained in Rule 9 of the Rajasthan Prisoners Release On Parole Rules, 1958, according to which, if a convict might have already spent in jail 1/4th of his sentence imposed upon him, he is entitled for parole for a period of 20 days. 7. Accordingly, we allow this petition and petitioner Rais son of Laltif is directed to be released on parole for a period of 20 days form the date of his release. In other words, his sentence shall stand suspended for a period of 20 days from the date of his release and he shall be released on parole as per the relevant rules. The petitioner is directed to surrender before the jail authorities immediately after expiry of 20 days parole from the date of his release. 8. With the above, the petition stands disposed of .