Rajasthan High Court
Sukhdev Singh S/O Shri Succha ... vs State Of Rajasthan on 1 February, 2021
Bench: Prakash Gupta, Chandra Kumar Songara
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
D.B. Criminal Writ Petition No. 783/2020
Sukhdev Singh S/o Shri Succha Singh, R/o Sahsan, PS Jurhara,
Distt. Bharatpur Raj. (At Present Confined In Central Jail Sewar,
Bharatpur Raj.)
Through His Brother Bhagwant Singh S/o Shri Succha Singh,
Aged About 20 Years, R/o Sahsan, PS Jurhara, Distt. Bharatpur
Raj.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Inspector General Of Prisons
Directorate Prisons Ghatgate Jaipur
2. Dist. Parole Advisory Committee, Through The Dist.
Magistrate Bharatpur Raj.
3. Superintendent, Central Jail Sewar Bharatpur Raj.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Govind Prasad Rawat
For Respondent(s) : Mr. N.S. Gurjar, Public Prosecutor
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAKASH GUPTA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA KUMAR SONGARA
Order
01/02/2021
This parole petition has been filed under Article 226 of
the Constitution of India with the prayer that the petitioner be
released on regular third parole for 40 days.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner was convicted by the trial court vide judgment dated
17.05.2017 for the offence under section 148, 302, 326/149,
324/149 IPC and 3/25 Arms Act and sentenced to undergo life
imprisonment. He further submits that the petitioner has served
about 8 years of sentence. Thus he has served a substantive part
(2 of 3) [CRLW-783/2020]
of his sentence. He further submits that the conduct and behavior
of the petitioner in jail has been good and unblemished. There is
no complaint against him by the authorities concerned and
therefore, he is entitled for third regular parole of 40 days under
Rule 9 of the Rajasthan Prisoners (Release on Parole) Rules, 1958.
A reply has been filed. It has been stated in the reply
that the petitioner's conduct was not satisfactory. He didn't work
as alloted to him in the month of March 2019, May 2019 to Aug,
2019 and October 2019 to December 2019 and remained absent
from Udyogshala. Social Justice and Empowerment Department
and Superintendent Central Jail Bharatpur have not recommended
for grant of parole to the petitioner. If the petitioner is released on
parole, an untoward incident may take place.
Heard learned counsel for the parties and carefully
perused the record.
Needless to say that in case the petitioner engages
himself in any untoward incident during third regular parole of 40
days under Rule 9 of the Rules of 1958, same can be withdrawn
and the petitioner can be called upon to serve his remaining
sentence.
Considering the purpose of the parole as also the
submissions of learned counsel for the parties, we deem it just
and proper to grant the petitioner third regular parole of 40 days
under Rule 9 of the Rules of 1958.
Accordingly, the writ petition succeeds and is hereby
allowed and the impugned order dated 19.10.2020 qua petitioner
stands quashed and set aside. We direct the concerned District
Authority to release the convict-petitioner on third regular parole
(3 of 3) [CRLW-783/2020]
of 40 days under Rule 9 of the Rules of 1958 subject to his
furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- with two
local sureties of Rs. 50,000/- each to the satisfaction of the
concerned District Magistrate with the stipulation that in case
during third regular parole of 40 days, the petitioner commits any
undesirable activity, he can be called upon to serve his remaining
sentence and at the same time he shall also maintain peace and
tranquility during the parole period and will abide by any other
condition imposed by the authority concerned.
(CHANDRA KUMAR SONGARA),J (PRAKASH GUPTA),J
Ashish Kumar / 11
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
