JUDGMENT Ajay Rastogi, J. - At joint request, matter is finally disposed of at admission stage.2. Instant petition has been filed by petitioner seeking first parole for twenty days under Rule 9 of Rajasthan Prisoner's Release on Parole Rules, 1958 ("Rules, 1958").3. As alleged, petitioner was involved in a criminal case for, offences under Sections 363, 366, I.P.C., but convicted under Sections 363, 366, 376(2)(g), I.P.C. and was sentenced to Ten years' RI and is undergoing his sentences awarded by trial Court, vide judgment dated 22.3.2006 against which his appeal (S.B. Cr. Appeal No. 615/2006) is pending before this Court; and presently is a prisoner in Central Jail, Jaipur.4. Petitioner is alleged to have served out 1/4th imprisonment awarded against him without remission and after having become eligible, he applied for grant of first parole under Rule 9 of Rules, 1958, on the premise of his house to be repaired. However, there was an adverse report of Superintendent of Police, Sikar dated 18.1.2008 (Ann.R.1) that on inspection, house of petitioner does not require any repair and there are other members also in his family to look after his house; but Assistant Director, Department of Social Justice in his report dated 23.12008 (Ann.R.2) observed that his house was found old and repairable. Based on adverse police report (supra), Advisory Committee declined to grant 1st parole and rejected his case vide order dated 19.5.2008 (Ann.1)(Ann.1).5. I have considered contentions of Counsel for parties and with their assistance, examined material on record. Rule 9 of Rules, 1958, clearly contemplates that if prisoner who has completed with remission, if any, one fourth of his sentence and subject to good conduct in jail, be considered for first parole for twenty days which includes days of journey to home and back.6. In instant case, as per report from jail authority, his conduct has been found to be satisfactory while in prison which was required to be considered by the authority while taking decision for grant of first parole under Rule 9 of Rules, 1958; and merely because there is adverse police report as alleged, no inference can be drawn that he would get involved in such criminal offence.7. It is also not case of respondents that petitioner is facing any other criminal offence/ trial. It is also not case of respondents that petitioner is facing any other criminal offence/ trial. There is no material placed on record by which it can be inferred that if parole is granted, petitioner would again involve in such kind of criminal offences; or report of jail authority which may adversely show his antecedents and character while in prison, certainly his case is covered for consideration for release on 1st parole under Rule 9 of Rules, 1958. In the opinion of this Court, if conduct and behaviour of petitioner being satisfactory in the jail while having undergone 1/4th of his sentence, and he is otherwise eligible, 1st parole in terms of Rule 9 of Rules, 1958 is not to be denied and the facts which respondents have taken note of for refusal of 1st parole, in the facts and circumstances of instant case are not legally sustainable.8. Consequently, writ petition stands allowed and communication dated 19.5.2008 (Ann.1) qua petitioner is hereby quashed. Superintendent, Central Jail, Jaipur, is directed to release petitioner (Sethi @ Mohd. Sharif) on 1st parole for twenty days including days of journey to home and back from the date of his release on furnishing his personal bond besides one surety of Rs. 30,000/- to the satisfaction of jail authority with the stipulation that he shall surrender himself and return back to the Central Jail, Jaipur, on expiry of twenty days (supra) to be notified by jail authority, and shall maintain peace and tranquility during 1st parole period. In case of failure to surrender by petitioner on stipulated date, the jail authority shall proceed in accordance with law. No costs. Petition allowed. *******