Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Yad Ram Lal vs State Of Rajasthan on 13 July, 2021
Bench: Pushpendra Singh Bhati
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Writ Petition No. 202/2021
Yad Ram Lal S/o Sh. Bhoj Raj, Aged About 27 Years, At Present
Lodged In Central Jail, Jodhpur Through His Brother Lekh Raj
S/o Bhoj Raj, Aged About 25 Years, R/o Faridpura Khushal, Dist.
Sambal, Uttar Pradesh.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Secretary Of Home Dept. Jaipur.
2. The District Collector, Jodhpur.
3. The Superintendent, Central Jail, Jodhpur.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Kalu Ram Bhati
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Mahipal Bishnoi, PP
HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI
Order
13/07/2021
In wake of second surge in the COVID-19 cases, abundant
caution is being maintained, while hearing the matters in Court,
for the safety of all concerned.
At the outset, counsel for the petitioner submits that due to
typographical error on the part of his office, the petitioner whose
name "Yad Ram" has been titled as "Yad Ram Lal" and thus,
petitioner's name be read as "Yad Ram".
Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner
confirms to the parameters of Rule 9 of the Rajasthan Prisoners
Release on Parole Rules 1958 (herein after referred to as "Rules of
1958).
(Downloaded on 15/07/2021 at 08:42:48 PM)
(2 of 3) [CRLW-202/2021]
It is not disputed in the present case the petitioner confirms
to parameters of Rule 9 being eligible for the parole in somuchso
that the Superintendent of Jail has recommended his release on
parole.
The only ground on which the parole has been refused is the
ground mentioned in Rule 14-A i.e. the place of permanent
residence is out of State and none resides there but at the same
time, it has been recorded by the respondents that his family
members are residing in Nagauri Gate at Diya Colony, Jodhpur.
Rule 14-A counsel for the petitioner has referred to judgment
rendered by Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court in the matter of
Mohan Lal Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2002(1) Cr.L.R (Raj.)
460 relevant para 11 & 12 reads as follows:-
"11. Any case of non-consideration by the authorities without
application of mind can be brought before the Court. It is desirable
that in such case where a prisoner whose ordinary place of residence
is outside the State of Rajasthan, his parole application is not
rejected by merely referring to R. 14. But genuine efforts should be
made to find out the correctness of the address, the antecedents of the
prisoner in the State of origin in which place of his ordinary residence
is situated; his reputation in the locality in the place of ordinary
residence and the circumstances in which release on parole is
requested and order is made on such premises, the purpose of R.1 4 is
served; rather than in not entertaining the application at all. It may
be cautioned what shall constitute "special reason" within the
meaning of R. 14 is not capable of exhaustively defined. Suffice it to
say that saying that the causes which routinely occur may not be a
ground for release. It ought to some exempliant circumstances.
12. We find from the application that the applicant apprehending
that this case for the parole shall not be considered as he is resident
of Haryana. He have moved the application directly to this Court. In
the aforesaid circumstances, we deem it proper that the application be
considered by Jail Superintendent in consultation with probation
(Downloaded on 15/07/2021 at 08:42:48 PM)
(3 of 3) [CRLW-202/2021]
officer and the District Magistrate, whether the applicant can be
released on parole."
This Court taking the overall perspective of parameters in
Rule 9 and Rule 14 as well as the positive report given by the
Superintendent of Central Jail, Jodhpur along with the precedent
law cited is of the opinion that it is a fit case where parole should
be granted.
The petitioner has already been undergone sentence of 04
years, 04 months & 07 days as on 14.06.2021, out of the total 10
years imprisonment awarded to him vide judgment dated
19.12.2020 by the learned Special Judge, POCSO Act cases,
Jodhpur.
Accordingly, this criminal writ petition is allowed. The
respondents are directed to release convict prisoner Yad Ram
S/o Sh. Bhoj Raj to avail 20 days first parole as per provisions of
Rajasthan Prisoners Release on Parole Rules, 1958 provided he
furnish two sureties in the sum of Rs.50,000/- each and a
personal-bond of Rs.1,00,000/- to the satisfaction of
Superintendent, Central Jail, Jodhpur. The Superintendent, Central
Jail, Jodhpur while releasing the convict-prisoner on parole, shall
be at liberty to impose other reasonable and adequate condition
to ensure his return to the State custody after availing the parole.
(DR.PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI),J.
72-Nirmala/Sanjay-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
