Rajudas vs State Of Rajasthan-State
2022 Latest Caselaw 11484 Raj

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR D.B. Criminal Writ Petition No. 307/2020

Rajudas, S/o Manshiram, By Caste Vaishnav, R/o Lapod Police Thana Takhtgarh, District Pali At Present Antaliya Police Thana Charbhuja, District Rajsamand (Raj.). (At Present Lodged At Central Jail Udaipur).

----Petitioner Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan-State, Through Secretary, Home Department, Jaipur.

2. The District Collector, Udaipur.

3. Superintendent, Central Jail, Udaipur.

                                                                    ----Respondents


    For Petitioner(s)        :     Ms. Laxmi Ramawat.
    For Respondent(s)        :     Mr. Pallav Sharma & Mr. Ritesh
                                   Chhaparwal for Mr. Anil Joshi, GA-
                                   cum-AAG.

HON'BLE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE MR. MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE REKHA BORANA

Order

15/09/2022

Heard.

This petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking

permanent parole, aggrieved by the order dated 01.01.2019 by

which application of the petitioner for grant of permanent parole

was rejected.

The facts giving rise to this petition are that the petitioner is

undergoing jail sentence after suffering judgment of conviction

and order of sentence dated 04.10.2021 in Sessions Case

No.85/2001 and further conviction and sentence, vide judgment

(2 of 3) [CRLW-307/2020]

and order dated 15.04.2002, passed in Sessions Case

No.91/2001.

Before we proceed further, it is relevant to mention here that

on a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C filed by the petitioner

before this Court, this Court vide order dated 13.09.2022 passed

in D.B. Criminal Misc. Application No.72/2022 has held that in

view of provisions contained in Section 427(2) Cr.P.C. both the life

sentences shall run concurrently.

The petitioner's application for permanent parole has been

rejected by the impugned order mainly on the ground that release

of the petitioner on permanent parole may endanger life and limb

of his wife and children. The other reason assigned in the order is

that the petitioner is likely to abscond in the event of grant of

permanent parole. The order also records that the petitioner did

not undertake the work as directed while undergoing jail sentence

and for that penalty was imposed upon him on three occasions.

This Court vide order dated 26.07.2021 granted 40 days

regular parole to the petitioner so as to assess his conduct during

this period.

The petitioner after availing the period of 40 days regular

parole has been readmitted in the jail.

Learned counsel for the respondent would submit that as per

the reports available with the jail authorities, the conduct of the

petitioner during the period he was on parole for a period of 40

days has been satisfactory and there is no complaint against him.

We also find that the affidavit of the wife of the petitioner is

also on record which negates reasons which were assigned in the

order dated 01.01.2019 for rejecting the application for grant of

permanent parole.

(3 of 3) [CRLW-307/2020]

As conduct of the petitioner during the period of forty days'

when he remained on parole has been found satisfactory, now it

cannot be said that there is any material to draw an inference that

in event of grant of permanent parole he is likely to abscond.

There are no other impediments for granting permanent parole to

the petitioner whether it be under the Rules of 1958 or under the

new Rules of 2021. The petitioner is thus entitled to grant benefit

of permanent parole as he by now has undergone more than 22

years of jail sentence. Thus, viewed from any angle, the

petitioner is entitled to grant of benefit of permanent parole.

In view of above consideration and keeping in view the

orders passed by this Court in the case of Raju @ Rajkumar V/s.

State & ors (D.B. Criminal Writ Petition No.314/2022, decided on

01.09.2022), Nahar Singh V/s. State & Ors. (D.B. Criminal Writ

Petition No.311/2019, decided on 19.09.2019) and Narayan V/s.

State & Ors. (D.B. Criminal Writ Petition No.301/2018, decided on

19.02.2019), we are inclined to grant permanent parole to the

petitioner.

Accordingly, the instant petition is allowed and while setting

aside impugned order dated 01.01.2019, it is directed that the

convict prisoner Rajudas S/o Mansharam be released on

permanent parole upon his furnishing personal bond in the sum of

Rs.50,000/- with two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each to the

satisfaction of Superintendent, Central Jail, Udaipur on the usual

terms and conditions.

(REKHA BORANA),J (MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA),ACJ

287-a.asopa/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)