Rajasthan High Court
Ajay S/O Shri Ramnivas vs State Of Rajasthan on 5 August, 2022
Bench: Pankaj Bhandari, Sameer Jain
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
D.B. Criminal Writ Petition No. 392/2022
Ajay S/o Shri Ramnivas, Aged About 26 Years, R/o Village
Dhigariya Kapoor, Police Station Bandikui, District Dausa (At
Present In Central Jail Jaipur) Through His Wife Pooja Devi W/o
Shri Ajay, Aged About 25 Years, R/o Village Dhigariya Kapoor,
Police Station Bandikui, District Dausa (Raj.)
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary Home,
Secretariat, Jaipur.
2. The District Magistrate, Dausa
3. Superintendent Central Jail, Jaipur.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Vishram Prajapati, Adv.
For Respondent(s) : Ms. Rekha Madnani, Additional
Government Advocate
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PANKAJ BHANDARI
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SAMEER JAIN
Order
05/08/2022
1. Petitioner has preferred this writ petition through his
wife seeking emergent parole for a period of 30 days on ground of
his wife's want of progeny.
2. Leaned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance on
the judgment of Division Bench of this Court in D. B. Criminal
Writ Petition No. 10/2022 titled as Nand Lal Vs. State & Ors.
3. Learned Additional Government Advocate has
submitted reply wherein she has stated that accused-petitioner
has been sentenced to life imprisonment till his natural life. The
(2 of 3) [CRLW-392/2022]
accused-petitioner is convicted for a heinous offence under the
POCSO Act. Learned Additional Government Advocate has
produced the judgment passed by the Hon'ble Apex Court in SLP
(Criminal) Diary No. 21875/2022 dated 1.08.2022, arising out
of the judgment relied by learned counsel for the petitioner in
Nand lal (supra) and the Hon'ble Apex Court has passed the
following order:-
"Delay condoned.
While we have reservations on some of the
observations made in the impugned order, we are not
inclined to interfere with the direction which would
have been implemented. However, it is clarified that
it will be open to the petitioners to raise all pleas and
contentions before the High Court. In case any third
person applied for parole/furlough giving same/similar
reason. Such plea and contention would be examined
on merits.
Recording the aforesaid, the petitioner for
special leave to appeal is dismissed.
Pending application(s), if any, shall stand
disposed of."
4. From perusal of Rule relied upon for grant of present
petition i.e. Rule 11 of the Rajasthan Prisoners Release on Parole
Rules, 2021 (for short, 'the Rules of 2021'), the emergent cases
mentioned therein include critical condition on account of illness of
any close relative; death of any such close relative; serious
damage to life or property from any natural calamity; marriage of
a Prisoner, his/her son or daughter or his/her brothers/sister in
case his/her parents are not alive; and delivery of Prisoner's wife.
'Progeny' as such is not included in the above list. In the facts of
the present case, the accused is convicted for a heinous offence
under POCSO Act and has undergo life sentence till his natural life.
5. In the light of the observations made by the Hon'ble
Apex Court and also as the petition does not qualify in the
(3 of 3) [CRLW-392/2022]
emergent cases, more particularly as the release of prisoner on
the Rules of 2021 otherwise provide for release of prisoner for a
period of 20 days, 30 days, 40 days, as the case may be, after a
particular period in custody, the right of progeny cannot be
claimed as of right. This court is of the considered view that if
such petitions are to be entertained then floodgate of such
petitions wuold open and prisoners may come to the Court every
month stating therein that wife could not conceive or for other
consequential reasons. This Court in D. B. Criminal Writ
Petition No. 200/2022 titled as Vandana Sharma & Anr. Vs.
State of Rajasthan & Ors., declined the application for emergent
parole for similar circumstances.
6. From perusal of the Rule 11 of the Rules of 2021, it is
evident that legislature did not intend to include progeny as a
ground for release on emergent parole, hence, we are not inclined
to entertain the writ petition.
7. The writ petition (emergent parole) is accordingly,
dismissed.
(SAMEER JAIN),J (PANKAJ BHANDARI),J
Pooja/13
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
