Rajasthan High Court
Ganesh @ Latur S/O Late Shri ... vs State Of Rajasthan on 3 August, 2022
Bench: Birendra Kumar
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Criminal Writ Petition No. 225/2022
Ganesh @ Latur S/o Late Shri Chotelal, Aged About 45 Years,
R/o House No. 32 Yagyashala Ki Bawari, Purani Basti Ward No.
65 Police Station Nahargarh, District Jaipur (Raj.) ( At Present In
Special Central Jail Shalyawas Dausa ) Through Hits Wife Namely
Pinki Devi W/o Shri Ganesh @ Latur Aged About 42 Years, R/o
House No. 32 Yagyashala Ki Bawari, Purani Basti Ward No. 65
Police Station Nahargarh, District Jaipur (Raj.)
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary Home,
Secretariat, Jaipur.
2. Prisoners Open Air Camp Advisory Committee, Through
Its Director, Jaipur.
3. Director General Of Prisons, Directorate Prisons Rajasthan
Ghatgate, Jaipur.
4. Superintendent Special Central Jail, Shalyawas Dausa
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Vishram Prajapti
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Chandragupt Chopra, PP
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BIRENDRA KUMAR
Order
03/08/2022
Prayer is for transfer to open air camp which has been
refused by Advisory Committee. Petitioner is serving out
imprisonment for life for the offences punishable under Section
376 IPC and section 5 and 6 of POCSO Act. Petitioner is in custody
for more than 10 years, conduct of the petitioner in jail was
satisfactory .
(2 of 3) [CRLW-225/2022]
The Rajasthan Prisoners Open Air Camp Rules, 1972 provides
for sending convicts to open air camp with object to encourage
good conduct, satisfactory performance of work and a life of self
discipline among the convicts of Rajasthan.
A Division Bench of this court in the case of Subhash Chand
Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors., (D.B. Civil Writ Petition No.
12020/2013, decided on 30th August 2014 reiterating its earlier
view in Krishna & Anr. Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. 2004 (4) WLC
(Raj.) 582 & Geeta Devi Vs. State of Rajasthan 2012 (3) WLC
(Raj.) 146, has held in paras 10 and 11 of the said Judgment, ad-
infra:-
"10. Since rule 3 of the Rules of 1972 has already been
considered and the word 'ordinarily' has already been
interpreted as 'not necessarily', therefore, respondents
cannot refuse to accept and consider the applications of
the petitioners, subject to other conditions. The present
matters are fully covered by decisions of this Court in
Krishna & Anr. Vs. State of Rajasthan (supra) & Geeta
Devi Vs. State of Rajasthan (supra).
11.In view of above discussion, we allow both the writ
petitions and direct the respondents to accept and
consider the applications of the petitioners for their
transfer to open air camp, in accordance with law and in
case they are otherwise eligible, as early as possible, but
not later than a period of three months from the date of
receipt of copy of this order."
I have heard and considered the submissions advanced by
the petitioner's counsel and the learned Public Prosecutor have
gone through the impugned order and the material placed on
record.
In view of the above, respondents have wrongly rejected the
application of the petitioner for availing the Open Air Camp. In my
considered opinion, observation made by the Committee in the
adverse recommendations is absolutely extraneous and
unwarranted. Needless to say that if any convict is found behaving
(3 of 3) [CRLW-225/2022]
in an improper manner while being at the Open Air Camp, the
indulgence so granted can always be cancelled because the
opportunity to continue at the Open Air Camp is always subject to
display of good behaviour by the convict.
As a consequence, the impugned recommendations issued
by the Open Air Committee are hereby quashed qua the petitioner.
It is hereby directed that the convict petitioner shall forthwith be
sent to the suitable Open Air Camp.
The writ petition is allowed accordingly.
(BIRENDRA KUMAR),J
ashu /98
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
