Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Punaram vs State on 16 March, 2021
Bench: Sandeep Mehta, Devendra Kachhawaha
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
D.B. Criminal Writ Petition No. 49/2021
Punaram, S/o Lachhiram By Caste Meghwal, R/o Madariya Bus
Stand Police Thana Devgarh, District Rajsamand (Raj.). (At
Present Lodged In Central Jail Udaipur)
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State, Through Secretary, Home Dept. Jaipur.
2. Collector, Rajsamand.
3. Superintendent, Central Jail, Udaipur.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : By post.
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Abhishek Purohit, Associate to
Mr. Farzand Ali, AAG-cum-GA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP MEHTA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEVENDRA KACHHAWAHA
Judgment
16/03/2021
Heard. Perused the material available on record.
The convict-petitioner applied for grant of twenty days' first
parole. His parole application has been rejected by the District
Level Parole Advisory Committee, Rajsamand vide adverse
recommendations dated 20.11.2020. Aggrieved thereby, the
convict petitioner has approached this Court through this writ
petition for assailing the adverse recommendations.
The adverse recommendations indicate that the conduct of
the convict in prison has been satisfactory. The Superintendent of
(2 of 3) [CRLW-49/2021]
Police, Rajsamand has submitted an adverse report dated
17.09.2020 (Annexure-R/1) wherein, contradictory findings are
evident. The report reveals that the complainant's father and
grandfather stated that there has been no dispute between the
parties after the case but despite that expressed reservation that
in case the convict-petitioner comes on parole, disputes may
arise. On these grounds, the Superintendent of Police, Rajsamand
mentioned that if the convict-petitioner is released on parole,
violence may take place with him and the law and order situation
may be adversely effected. The Social Welfare Department has
opined that there is no likelihood of any dispute arising in case the
convict-petitioner is released on parole.
Suffice it to say that maintaining law and order is the duty of
the State machinery and in case, any apprehension to peace or
tranquility is felt upon release of the convict-prisoner on parole,
appropriate preventive measures can always be taken. By merely
citing this reason, the authorities cannot shirk their
responsibilities.
In this background, we are inclined to accept the
instant parole petition, which is hereby allowed. The adverse
recommendations drawn in the meeting of District Parole
Committee, Rajsamand dated 20.11.2020 are struck down qua the
convict prisoner and it is ordered that the convict Punaram S/o
Lachhiram shall be released on first parole of twenty days upon
his furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs.80,000/- with two
sound and solvent surety of Rs.40,000/- each to the satisfaction of
Superintendent Central, Jail, Udaipur on the usual terms and
(3 of 3) [CRLW-49/2021]
conditions. The Superintendent, Central Jail, Udaipur shall be at
liberty to impose other adequate and reasonable conditions to
ensure return of the convict to the custody after availing the
parole. The term of parole shall be computed from the date of his
actual release.
(DEVENDRA KACHHAWAHA),J (SANDEEP MEHTA),J
22-Sudhir Asopa/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
