Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2017 DIGILAW 169 (RAJ)

Rameshwar S/o Shri Chhoturam v. State of Rajasthan Through the Secretary Home, Secretariat, Jaipur

2017-01-13

PRASHANT KUMAR AGARWAL

body2017
ORDER : 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. By this writ petition, the petitioner, who is undergoing sentence in the Central Jail, Jaipur seeks grant of regular parole for twenty days under Rule 9 of the Rajasthan Release of Prisoners on Parole Rules, 1958. The petitioner was convicted and sentenced by the Additional District and Session Judge, Shahpura, District Jaipur vide judgment and order dated 28.04.2015 in Sessions Case No. 14/2013 for offences under Sections 148, 149, 323 & 304-Part-II of I.P.C. and awarded maximum sentence for simple imprisonment of ten years. Against the aforesaid judgment S.B. Criminal Appeal No.379/2015 is pending before this High Court. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner submitted an application before the District Parole Advisory Committee, which was considered in its meeting dated 14.06.2016 and the same was dismissed on the ground of adverse police report and accordingly order was passed on 22.06.2016. It was also submitted that as per Rule 9 of the Rules of 1958, the petitioner is entitled to grant of first parole for twenty days and cannot be declined on the apprehension that there is possibility of breach of peace, if petitioner is released on parole and more particularly in view of the fact that there is no material available on record to support the apprehension of Superintendent of Police. 4. Learned Public Prosecutor submits that the petitioner is not entitled to grant of parole due to adverse police report. 5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the conduct of the petitioner in jail, the report of the police cannot be considered to be the sole ground to refuse regular parole to the petitioner. There is no material made available on record to support the apprehension of Superintendent of Police that if the petitioner is released on bail, there is possibility of breach of peace. Therefore, I deem it proper to grant first parole to the petitioner for twenty days under Rule 9 of the Rules of 1958. 6. It is, therefore, ordered that the petitioner Shri Rameshwar son of Shri Chhoturam, presently undergoing sentence in the Central Jail, Jaipur, shall be released on parole for twenty days provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties of Rs. 6. It is, therefore, ordered that the petitioner Shri Rameshwar son of Shri Chhoturam, presently undergoing sentence in the Central Jail, Jaipur, shall be released on parole for twenty days provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties of Rs. 25,000/- each to the satisfaction of the District Magistrate, Jaipur to the effect that he will surrender himself before the Superintendent Central Jail, Jaipur on completion of twenty days i.e. the parole period. The parole period shall be counted from the date of his release. 7. Consequently, the writ petition stands disposed of.