Allowed

Inderraj Singh v. State of Raj and Ors.

Rajasthan HC1 Feb 2008CW/477/2008

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a writ petition seeking parole for the petitioner, who was convicted under Sections 498-A and 304-B IPC. The Court held that an adverse police report cannot be the sole basis for denying parole and directed the Superintendent Central Jail to release the petitioner on first regular parole for twenty days.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to be released on first regular parole for twenty days upon furnishing a bond of Rs.30,000/- with two sureties of Rs.15,000/- each.

Inderraj Singh Vs State of Raj and Ors. — Bail and Remand | Rajasthan HC (2008)

¶1

SBCWP NO.477/2008.

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR.

¶4

O R D E R

¶5

S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION (PAROLE) NO.477/2008. Inder Raj Singh Vs. State and ors.

¶6

Date of order : 1/2/2008.

¶7

HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMAD RAFIQ

¶8

Shri Lakhan Singh Tomar for the petitioner. Shri Ankur Rastogi, Government Counsel. ******

¶9

This is a writ petition seeking direction to release the petitioner on first regular parole of twenty days.

¶10

The submission of the counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner was convicted and sentenced for offences under Sections 498-A and 304-B IPC vide judgment dated 22/6/2006 passed by the learned Special Judge (Women Atrocities & Dowry Cases), Jaipur City, Jaipur for 7 years. Counsel further submitted that petitioner has completed more than 3 years of sentence out of total period of sentence of 7 years which is more than 1/4^th of the total sentence and thus, petitioner is eligible for applying first regular parole. Further submission of the counsel for the petitioner is that the conduct of the petitioner in jail has been found satisfactory, yet on account of alleged adverse police report, the petitioner has not been granted the first regular parole.

¶11

In the adverse report, it is stated that during the parole parole period, the petitioner may

¶12

SBCWP NO.477/2008.

¶13

¶14

abscond but there is no such basis for such an assumption. The petitioner is a permanent resident of village Dhani Tandawali, Tan. Jawanpura, P.S. Shahpura, Tehsil Kotputli, District Jaipur.

¶15

Shri Ankur Rastogi, learned Additional Government Counsel submits that as per the adverse police report, the petitioner may not be granted the parole.

¶16

I have considered the aforesaid aspect of the matter and further considered the judgment of this Court in SBCWP No.919/2007 and SBCWP No.6276/07 decided on 1.11.07, wherein it has been held that adverse police report cannot be the sole basis for denying the parole.

¶17

In the writ petition is allowed.

¶18

The Superintendent Central Jail, Jaipur is directed to release petitioner Inderraj Singh S/o Kan Singh, R/o village Dhani Tandawali, Tan. Jawanpura, P.S. Shahpura, Tehsil Kotputli, District Jaipur (Rajasthan) on first regular parole for a period of twenty days from the date of his release provided, he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.30,000/- with two sureties of Rs.15,000/each to his satisfaction with the further stipulation that he would surrender before him on completion of parole period.

¶19

(MOHAMMAD RAFIQ), J.

¶20

anil/

Inderraj Singh v. State of Raj and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Inderraj Singh v. State of Raj and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Lalit Jaga Vs Shri R K Verma and Ors.

Bhanwr Lal Vs Commissioner,C.a.D.,Ignp,Bkn and Ors.

Shyam Singh Tamboli Vs a.v.v.N.Ltd.,Ajmer and Ors.

Ramniwas Jat Vs State and Anr.

M/S Star Delta Transformers Lt Vs Chairman andMANAGING Director and

Subhash Chand Vs Shiv Shankar and Ors.