Allowed

Sankarlal v. State

Rajasthan HC8 Jul 2019CRLW/174/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a writ petition filed by a prisoner requesting first parole. The Court held that the Parole Committee's rejection was based on vague grounds and directed the authorities to grant a 20-day parole subject to sureties and a personal bond, invoking Rule 14 of the Rajasthan Prisoners Release on Parole Rules, 1958.

What did the court decide?

Petition allowed. Respondents directed to release the convict prisoner for 20 days first parole upon furnishing two sureties (one close family member) of Rs. 25,000 each and a personal bond of Rs. 50,

Sankarlal Vs State — Bail and Remand | Rajasthan HC (2019)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶2

S.B. Criminal Writ Petition No. 174/2019

¶3

Sankarlal S/o Shri Chainaram, At Present Central Jail Bikaner Through His Mother Smt. Bhanwari W/o Chainara, Aged About 62 Years, B/c Nayak, R/o Chachaniya, Jaisalsar, P.s. Nokha, Dist. Bikaner.

¶4

----Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

State of Rajasthan, Through Secretary, Department Of Home, Secretariat, Rajasthan, Jaipur.

¶7

The District Collector, Bikaner.

¶8

The Superintendent, Central Jail, Bikaner.

¶9

----Respondents

¶10

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. K. R. Bhati For Respondent(s) : Mr. Mahipal Bishnoi, PP

¶11

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINIT KUMAR MATHUR

¶12

Order

¶13

08/07/2019

¶14

The instant petition has been filed by the convictprisoner through his mother, who is languishing in Central Jail, Bikaner for release on first parole of 20 days.

¶15

The Parole Committee has rejected the application on the ground of adverse police report.

¶16

The State has submitted its reply. In the reply, the apprehension has been expressed that if the convict-prisoner is released on parole, he may abscond. A report of the Superintendent of Police, Bikaner was also to the same effect. However, there is no foundation for such apprehension by the police.

¶17

(2 of 2)

¶18

[CRLW-174/2019]

¶19

This Court has considered the decision of Parole Committee rejecting the parole claimed. The convict-prisoner has already undergone a sentence of 03 years 08 months and 27 days as on 31.03.2019. It is pertinent to note that the petitioner does not suffer from any ineligibility for his release on parole as prescribed under Rule 14 of the Rajasthan Prisoners Release on Parole Rules, 1958.

¶20

It is well settled that parole is a device for reformation of a criminal for his rehabilitation in society. The object of parole can’t be frustrated on the basis of vague and ill-founded reasons.

¶21

Accordingly, this petition is allowed. The respondents are directed to release convict-prisoner Sankarlal S/o Shri Chainaram to avail 20 days first parole as per provisions of the Rules of 1958 provided he furnishes two sureties ( one of the surety will be of close family member ) in a sum of Rs.25,000/each and a personal-bond of Rs.50,000/- to the satisfaction of Superintendent, Central Jail, Bikaner. The Superintendent, Central Jail concerned will give a date for surrender of convict and shall also be at liberty to impose other reasonable and adequate conditions to ensure his return to the State custody after availing the parole. A copy of this order may be sent to the convict.

¶22

(VINIT KUMAR MATHUR),J

¶23

25-SunilS/-

Sankarlal v. State

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sankarlal v. State

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Monu @ Vikas Sirohiya Vs State of Rajasthan

Bhagwati Lal Gurjar Vs State of Rajasthan

Mukesh @ Sukharam Vs State

Panna Ram Vs State of Rajasthan

Smt Manju Devi Vs State of Rajasthan

Bharat Kumar Vs State