Rajasthan High Court
Omprakash Meghwal S/O Shri ... vs State Of Rajasthan on 25 February, 2021
Bench: Mahendar Kumar Goyal
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Criminal Writ Petition (Parole) No. 910/2020
Omprakash Meghwal S/o Shri Kanheyalal, R/o Chamra Factory
Ramchandrapura Chawani Ps Gumanpura Dist. Kota Raj. Present
Address House No 412 R.k.puram Special Gram Dhakadkhedi
Kalaptaru Ke Piche Ps Udhyog Nagar Dist. Kota Raj. (At Present
Confined In Central Jail Kota Raj.) Through His Brother Banti S/o
Shri Kanheyalal Aged About 25 Years R/o Chamra Factory
Ramchandrapura Chawani Ps Gumanpura Dist. Kota Raj. Present
Address House No 412 R.k.puram Special Gram Dhakadkhedi
Kalaptaru Ke Piche Ps Udhyog Nagar Dist. Kota 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 Kota Raj.
3. Superintendent, Central Jail Kota Raj.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Govind Prasad Rawat
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Prashant Sharma, P.P.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MAHENDAR KUMAR GOYAL
Order
25/02/2021
This criminal writ petition (parole) is filed for setting aside
the order dated 16.10.2020 passed by the District Magistrate,
Kota whereby, the application of the petitioner for grant of first
regular parole has been dismissed.
The facts as emerging from the record are that petitioner
was convicted by the Court of learned Special Judge, (POCSO)
Act, 2012, No.2, Kota in Sessions Case No.239/2018 vide
(2 of 3) [CRLW-910/2020]
judgment dated 01.08.2019 under Section(s) 363, & 366 of IPC,
Section 3/4 of the POCSO Act and was sentenced to 11 years
imprisonment.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that he has
served more than 4 years, 7 months and 22 days as on
14.01.2020 and thus acquired eligibility for grant of first regular
parole under Rule 9 of the Rajasthan Prisoners Act, 1958; but, the
respondents, vide order impugned dated 16.10.2020, rejected his
case for grant of parole on the ground of apprehension of breach
of peace as the petitioner and the complainant party are resident
of same vicinity. Relying on the judgments of this Court in cases of
Paras Ram Vs. State of Rajasthan [2007 (4) WLC (Raj.)
547] and Smt. Sushila Kanwar Vs. State of Rajasthan [RCC
1994 RCC 564], he prayed for setting aside the order impugned
dated 16.10.2020 and for grant of first regular parole to him.
Learned Public Prosecutor opposed the prayer.
Heard the learned counsels for the parties and perused the
record.
Undisputedly, the petitioner has earned eligibility for grant of
first regular parole under Rule 9 of the Rules of 1958. The local
police has not recommended his release on first parole. Assistant
Director, Department of Social Justice and Empowerment, Kota
has, vide its report dated 11.05.2020, accorded no objection for
grant of regular parole to him. The police recommendation is
based on mere apprehension and without any reasonable basis.
The purpose of parole is to facilitate family ties being maintained
which cannot be permitted to be frustrated by the respondents on
flimsy grounds.
(3 of 3) [CRLW-910/2020]
Consequently, the order impugned dated 16.10.2020 qua the
petitioner is quashed and set aside. This writ petition is allowed.
The petitioner shall be released on parole for 20 days on
furnishing personal bond in sum of Rs.1,000,00/- with two
sureties of Rs.50,000/- each to the satisfaction of the concerned
District Magistrate with the stipulation that in case during parole of
20 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.
(MAHENDAR KUMAR GOYAL),J
Manish/45
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
