Rajasthan High Court
Nannu Singh S/O Babu Singh vs State Of Rajasthan on 29 January, 2021
Bench: Prakash Gupta, Chandra Kumar Songara
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
D.B. Criminal Writ Petition No. 22/2021
Nannu Singh S/o Babu Singh, Aged About 35 Years, R/o Vill.
Fatehpur PS Kathumar Tehsil Laxmangarh Dist. Alwar At Present
Confined In Special Central Jail Dausa Raj.
Through His Brother Deepak Singh S/o Babu Singh Age 40 Years
R/o Vill. Fatehpur PS Kathumar Tehsil Laxmangarh Dist. Alwar
Raj.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Inspector General Prision
Jaipur
2. The Distt. Collector, Alwar
3. The Superintendent, Central Jail Dousa
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Lakhan Singh Tomar
For Respondent(s) : Mr. N.S. Gurjar, Public Prosecutor
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAKASH GUPTA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA KUMAR SONGARA
Order
29/01/2021
This parole petition has been filed under Article 226 of
the Constitution of India with the prayer that the petitioner be
released on first parole for 20 days.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner was convicted by the trial court vide judgment dated
04.07.2019 for the offence under section 376(2) IPC and
sentenced to undergo life imprisonment. He further submits that
the petitioner has served more than 6 years of sentence. Thus he
(2 of 3) [CRLW-22/2021]
has served a substantive part of his sentence. He further submits
that there is no complaint against him by the authorities
concerned and therefore, he is entitled for first regular parole of
20 days under Rule 9 of the Rajasthan Prisoners (Release on
Parole) Rules, 1958. He further submits that the police
department has submitted adverse report against the petitioner
but the report of social welfare department is in his favour.
A reply has been filed. It has been stated in the reply
the 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 first parole of 20 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under Rule 9 of the Rules of 1958 same can be withdrawn and the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 first parole of 20 days under
Rule 9 of the Rules of 1958.
Accordingly, the writ petition succeeds and is hereby
allowed and the impugned order dated 03.11.2020 qua petitioner
stands quashed and set aside. We direct the concerned District
Authority to release the convict-petitioner on first parole of 20
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 first parole of
(3 of 3) [CRLW-22/2021]
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.
(CHANDRA KUMAR SONGARA),J (PRAKASH GUPTA),J
Prerit / 22
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
