Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2019 DIGILAW 741 (RAJ)

Prem Singh v. State

2019-03-06

PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI

body2019
JUDGMENT : Pushpendra Singh Bhati, J. 1. Learned counsel for the petitioner has shown the order passed by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Hon'ble Court in Narayan Lal vs. State & Ors. (S.B. Civil Parole Writ Petition No. 9577/2014) decided on 04.02.2015. The said order dated 04.02.2015 reads as follows:- "The convict-prisoner has preferred this letter petition for granting him permanent parole, which was treated as petition for writ and notices were issued to the respondents. According to the reply submitted on behalf of the respondents, the convict-prisoner was convicted vide judgment dated 08.07.2009 by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sojat for the offences under Sections 376, 377 and 342 IPC and was sentenced to undergo 10 years' rigorous imprisonment with a fine of Rs. 10,500/-, in default whereof to further undergo one year and one month's simple imprisonment. The convict-prisoner preferred appeal before this court, which is still pending. It was also submitted in the reply that till 06.01.2015, the convict-prisoner has served the sentence for 7 years 4 months and 25 days. Previously, he was given the first parole for 20 days, second parole for 30 days and third parole for 40 days. The convict-prisoner applied for permanent parole before the State Parole Committee, which did not recommend to grant permanent parole and referred the matter to the State Govt. The State Government, while considering the case of the convict prisoner for permanent parole, agreed with the recommendations of the State Parole Committee on the ground that the convict-prisoner, while working on the post of Teacher, committed evil with two minor boys. The learned Govt. Advocate, while narrating the reply, prayed that this petition may be dismissed. Section 9 of the Rajasthan Prisoners Release on Parole Rules, 1958 reads as under:- "A prisoner, who has completed with remission, if any, (one-fourth) of his sentence and subject to good conduct in the Jail, may be released on 1st parole for 20 days including days of journey to home and back, and for 30 days on 2nd parole provided his behavior has been good during the 1st parole and for 40 days on third parole provided his behaviour has been good during second parole. If during the third parole also the prisoner has behaved well and his character has been exceedingly well and if the prisoner's conduct has been such that he is not likely to relapse into crime, his case may be recommended to the Govt. through the State Committee for permanent release on parole on such conditions as deemed fit by the Superintendent of Jail and the District Magistrate concerned; the chief condition among them being that if the prisoner while on parole commits any offence or abets, directly or indirectly, commission of any offence, he has to undergo the unexpired portion of the sentence in addition to any sentence imposed upon him by reason of such an offence. In cases the permanent release on parole is rejected the prisoner will be eligible for release on parole for 40 days every year subject to the same conditions for the remaining period of his sentence." From the perusal of the above, it reveals that there is no bar in releasing a prisoner on the ground of committing an offence against minor children and for the offences for which the convict-prisoner has been convicted and sentenced. The State Parole Committee, while not recommending the case of the convict-prisoner for his release on permanent parole, has committed error. No other reason has been given for not recommending for his release on permanent parole. Further, the convict prisoner has already availed the first, second and third parole. In view of the above, this petition for writ deserves to be allowed, which is hereby allowed and it is ordered that the convict-prisoner Narayan Lal be released on permanent parole provided he furnishes a personal bond of Rs. 1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh) with two sureties of Rs. 50,000/- each to the satisfaction of the concerned Superintendent of Jail with the usual conditions enshrined in Rule 9 of the Rules and as may be prescribed by the concerned Superintendent of Jail. A copy of this order be given to the learned Government Advocate and be also sent to the concerned Superintendent of Jail." 2. The convict-prisoner is seeking permanent parole upon which reply has been filed by the respondents. A copy of this order be given to the learned Government Advocate and be also sent to the concerned Superintendent of Jail." 2. The convict-prisoner is seeking permanent parole upon which reply has been filed by the respondents. According to the reply submitted on behalf of the respondents, vide judgment dated 13.06.2013 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Balotra in case No. 27/2012, the convict-prisoner was convicted for the offences under Sections 363 and 376 of IPC and sentenced to undergo 10 years' rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 15,000/-, in default whereof, to further undergo three years' imprisonment. It is also stated in the reply that till 31.12.2018, the convict-prisoner has served the sentence of 8 years, 05 months and 23 days. It is further admitted in para 5 of the reply that the convict-prisoner was granted first parole of 20 days from 19.06.2015 to 08.07.2015, 30 days from 20.09.2016 to 19.10.2016 and 40 days from 27.10.2017 to 05.02.2017. The convict-prisoner applied for permanent parole but the same has been denied. 3. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that looking into the heinous crime, the parole application may be dismissed, but he is not in a position to refute the judgment of Narayan Lal (supra) as quoted hereinabove. 4. Section 9 of the Rajasthan Prisoners Release on Parole Rules, 1958 reads as under:- "A prisoner, who has completed with remission, if any, (one-fourth) of his sentence and subject to good conduct in the Jail, may be released on 1st parole for 20 days including days of journey to home and back, and for 30 days on 2nd parole provided his behavior has been good during the 1st parole and for 40 days on third parole provided his behaviour has been good during second parole. If during the third parole also the prisoner has behaved well and his character has been exceedingly well and if the prisoner's conduct has been such that he is not likely to relapse into crime, his case may be recommended to the Government through the State Committee for permanent release on parole on such conditions as deemed fit by the Superintendent of Jail and the District Magistrate concerned; the chief condition among them being that if the prisoner while on parole commits any offence or abets, directly or indirectly, commission of any offence, he has to undergo the unexpired portion of the sentence in addition to any sentence imposed upon him by reason of such an offence. In cases the permanent release on parole is rejected the prisoner will be eligible for release on parole for 40 days every year subject to the same conditions for the remaining period of his sentence." 5. From the perusal of the above, it reveals that there is no bar in releasing a prisoner on the ground of committing an offence against minor children and for the offences for which the convict-prisoner has been convicted and sentenced. The State Parole Committee, while not recommending the case of the convict-prisoner for his release on permanent parole, has committed an error. No other reason has been given for not recommending his release on permanent parole. Further, the convict-prisoner has already availed the first, second and third paroles. 6. In view of the above, this petition for writ deserves to be allowed, and the same is hereby allowed and it is ordered that the convict-prisoner Prem Singh @ Vikram Singh s/o. Shri Arjun Singh be released on permanent parole provided he furnishes a personal bond of Rs. 1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh) with two sureties of Rs. 50,000/- each to the satisfaction of the concerned Superintendent of Jail with the usual conditions enshrined in Rule 9 of the Rules and as may be prescribed by the concerned Superintendent of Jail. 7. A copy of this order be given to the learned Government Advocate and be also sent to the concerned Superintendent of Jail.