[Cites 0, Cited by 0]
Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Subhash vs State Of Rajasthan ... on 6 January, 2026
Author: Vinit Kumar Mathur
Bench: Vinit Kumar Mathur
[2026:RJ-JD:210-DB]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
D.B. Criminal Writ Petition No. 2849/2025
Subhash S/o Late Shri Dolatram, Aged About 50 Years, (At
Present Lodged In Central Jail Bikaner) Through His Mother Smt.
Sajana Devi W/o Late Shri Dolatram Aged About 65 Years R/o
Ward No 04 P.S. Suratgarh, District Sriganganagar.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Secretary Of Home Depart.
Jaipur.
2. The Director General (Jail), Jaipur.
3. The District Collector, Sriganganagar.
4. The Superintendent, Central Jail Bikaner.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Kalu Ram Bhati.
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Deepak Choudhary, GA cum AAG
assisted by Mr. Kuldeep Singh
Kumpawat.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINIT KUMAR MATHUR
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA SHEKHAR SHARMA
Order
06/01/2026
1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. This criminal parole writ petition has been filed by the
petitioner-convict being aggrieved of the order dated 06.05.2025
whereby, the Home Department of the State of Rajasthan while
relying on the recommendations of the State Level Parole
Committee has refused to release the petitioner on permanent
parole.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner
is facing incarceration in pursuance of the judgment dated
(Uploaded on 07/01/2026 at 12:08:26 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:210-DB] (2 of 4) [CRLW-2849/2025]
22.12.2008 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge Bhadra,
District Hanumangarh in Sessions Case No.19/2006 and the order
dated 27.03.2009 passed by this Court in D.B. Murder Reference
No.01/2009. He further submits that the convict-petitioner is
undergoing sentence of imprisonment for life and he has
completed a period of more than 18 years and 2 months of
incarceration and has preferred an application for grant of
permanent parole. He also submits that the convict-petitioner
fulfills all the requisite conditions for release on parole as per the
Rajasthan Prisoners Release on Parole Rules, 1958 (hereinafter
referred to as 'Rules of 1958). He further submits that the convict-
petitioner does not incur any ineligibility as per Rule 14 (c) of the
Rules of 1958 and, therefore, the State Level Committee
committed an error while rejecting the application for release on
permanent parole despite the convict-petitioner having actually
undergone custody of more than 14 years and 9 months. Learned
counsel for the petitioner also submits that the conduct of the
convict-petitioner in Jail in last 05 years is reported to be good.
Learned counsel, therefore, prays that in these circumstances, the
application seeking release of convict-petitioner on permanent
parole may be allowed.
4. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents while
opposing the submissions made by learned counsel for the
petitioner submits that the convict-petitioner's conduct has been
taken note of by the State Level Parole Committee and it was
found that the convict-petitioner has not reported to the jail
authorities after completion of the parole period while he was
released on second parole.
(Uploaded on 07/01/2026 at 12:08:26 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:210-DB] (3 of 4) [CRLW-2849/2025]
5. Learned counsel for the respondents further submits that a
number of cases are pending against the convict-petitioner and he
is a habitual offender, therefore, the State Level Parole Committee
has rightly rejected the application preferred by the convict-
petitioner. He, therefore, prays that the present writ petition may
be dismissed.
6. We have considered the submissions made at the bar and
have gone through the relevant record of the case.
7. It is undisputed fact that the convict-petitioner has
undergone incarceration of more than 18 years, out of which, 14
years and 9 months is the actual period of incarceration. It is true
that a number of cases has been registered against the convict-
petitioner, but fact of the matter remains that the conduct of the
convict-petitioner in last 5 years in jail is reported to be
satisfactory. Further, the convict-petitioner has undergone a period
of more than 18 years in jail and, therefore, we are of the view
that as per the eligibility conditions mentioned in the Rules of
1958, the case of the convict-petitioner for release on permanent
parole merits acceptance. Thus, we are of the opinion that the
convict-petitioner is entitled to be enlarged on permanent parole.
8. In view of the facts noted above, we hereby accept this writ
petition, set aside the impugned order dated 06.05.2025 and
direct that the convict-petitioner Subhash S/o Late Shri
Dolatram shall be released on permanent parole provided he
furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees:
Fifty Thousand Only) to the satisfaction of the Superintendent, Jail
concerned. He shall also furnish an undertaking to the effect that
he shall mark his presence at the Police Station Suratgarh City,
(Uploaded on 07/01/2026 at 12:08:26 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:210-DB] (4 of 4) [CRLW-2849/2025]
District Sriganganagar once every six months during the period of
parole. The convict-petitioner shall also provide his Aadhar Card
Number (if available), mobile number and the permanent address
with the undertaking.
(CHANDRA SHEKHAR SHARMA),J (VINIT KUMAR MATHUR),J
26-SunilS/Shahenshah/-
(Uploaded on 07/01/2026 at 12:08:26 PM)
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
