ORDER : Instant petition has been filed by the convict-petitioner Mukesh @ Pappu S/o Shri Prabhatya @ Prabhati Lal seeking First Regular Parole u/Rule 9 of the Rajasthan Prisoner (Release on Parole) Rules, 1958. 2. The petitioner was convicted under Section 302 & 376 (2) of IPC passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sawaimadhopur in Sessions case No.3/2012 vide judgment dated 06.02.2015 and sentenced to life imprisonment with the rider to effect sentence till life and not be entitled to any kind of remission in the sentence. 3. It is true that in terms of the judgment dated 06.02.2015 the convict-petitioner is not entitled to claim any remission to which he is entitled but at the same time that may not take away his right of seeking regular parole which is contemplated under the Scheme of Rules, 1958. 4. This very question came up for consideration as to whether if one is convicted and sentenced to life imprisonment with rider to effect sentence till life will make him entitled for grant of Parole under the Rules of 1958 has been examined by the Coordinate Bench of this Court in DBCWP No.4751 of 2016 Gopal v. State of Rajasthan & Ors. decided on 11.8.2016 and operative part whereof reads ad infra:- "On hearing learned counsel for the parties and perusing the record, we find that the writ petition has been filed by the petitioner through his mother, who is ready to take his responsibility and further the report the Superintendent of Police has based its report on the report of the Probation and Prison Welfare Officer, Social Justice and Empowerment Department, Jaipur Rural, Jaipur, which is based on surmises and conjectures. Merely because the Division Bench of this court, while affirming the conviction of the convict-petitioner for offence under Section 302 IPC, directed that he shall not be released from the prison unless he has served out at least 20 years of imprisonment including the period already undergone by him, does not mean that he would not be entitled to be released on parole. The relevant part of judgment of the Apex Court dated 30.09.2002 in Sri Bhagwan, supra, on which reliance has been placed by the Division Bench while upholding the conviction and sentence of the convict-petitioner, reads as under:- "In the impugned order, the High Court while rejecting the application filed by the petitioner has observed that as there is no clear indication in the judgment rendered by this Court that applicant could or could not be released temporarily on parole before completion of 20 years of imprisonment, therefore, application for temporary parole is rejected. In our view, in judgment dated 10.05.2001 passed by this Court in Criminal appeal No.242 of 2000, it is nowhere stated that convict cannot be released on parole or furlough. It would be open to the applicant to move proper application before the competent authority under the rules for parole or furlough. The authority would consider the same in accordance with the applicable rules." The aforesaid order of the Apex Court contains unambiguous direction clarifying that the said order nowhere stated that convict cannot be released on parole or furlough unless he completes 20 years of imprisonment. The condition imposed by this court in the judgment dated 16.11.2005 regarding convict-petitioner that he shall not be released from the prison unless he served out at least 20 years of imprisonment, cannot be a reason not to consider his prayer for parole or furlough. We therefore direct that the District Parole Advisory Committee, Jaipur, shall consider the case of the convict - petitioner afresh after making fresh enquiry through the Probation and Prison Welfare Officer, Social Justice and Empowerment Department, Jaipur and the Superintendent of Police, Jaipur Rural, Jaipur. The decision shall be taken by the Committee within three months from the date a copy of this order is placed before it". 5. In the instant case although application submitted by the petitioner was not considered by the District Parole Advisory Committee, Sawaimadhopur appears to be for the reason of alleged rider in the judgment dated 6.2.2015 of which reference has been made where he has been sentenced till life but at the same time that may not take away his right of seeking regular parole which is contemplated under the Scheme of Rules, 1958. 6. 6. The petition accordingly succeeds & is hereby allowed and we direct the District Parole Advisory Committee, Sawaimadhopur to consider the case of the convict-petitioner after making enquiry from the concerned police station, jail superintendent & Social Justice and Empowerment Department, Sawaimadhopur and the decision shall be taken by the District Parole Advisory Committee within three months from the date of copy of this order is placed before the Committee.