Allowed

Jitendra @ Jeetu S/O Late Shri Ramlal Meena v. the State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC11 Nov 2025CRLW/502/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner prayed for shifting from Central Jail to Open Air Camp. Court held that lack of concrete material or registered report indicating risk of future incidents precludes denial of the benefit, especially after successful parole.

What did the court decide?

Directed respondents to pass appropriate order for shifting petitioner from Central Jail to Open Air Camp.

Jitendra @ Jeetu S/O Late Shri Ramlal… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Rajasthan HC (2025)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

S.B. Criminal Writ Petition No. 502/2025

¶3

Jitendra @ Jeetu S/o Late Shri Ramlal Meena, Aged About 27 Years, R/o Plot No. C-74, Chatrasal Nagar, Getor, Jagatpura, Police Station Jawahar Circle, Jaipur (Raj.) (At Present Confined In Central Jail, Jaipur (Raj.) Through His Cousin Brother - Aakash Meena S/o Shri Gopal Lal Meena, Aged About 24 Years, R/o Ward No. 150, Satynarayan Ji Ki Bagichi, M.d. Road, Dada Badi Ke Pass, Jawahar Nagar, Jaipur. (Raj.)

¶4

----Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

The State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary Home, Secretariat, Jaipur (Raj.).

¶7

The Director General Of Prison, Directorate Prisons, Ghatgate, Jaipur (Raj. )

¶8

The Director General Of Police, Police Head Quarter, Lalkothi, Jaipur (Raj.)

¶9

Deputy Commissioner Of Police (East), Office At Gopalpura Mod, Tonk Road, Jaipur (Raj.)

¶10

Superintendent Central Jail, Jaipur (Raj.)

¶11

Mr. Manvendra Singh, Inspector, (Dst Team East) Through The Deputy Commissioner Of Police (East), Office At Gopalpura Mod, Tonk Road, Jaipur (Raj.)

¶12

----Respondents

¶13

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. T.C.Swami For Respondent(s) : Mr. Amit Gupta-PP

¶14

JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND

¶15

Order

¶16

11/11/2025

¶17

By way of filing this criminal writ petition, a prayer has been made for shifting the petitioner from Special Central Jail, Shyalawas, Dausa to Open Air Camp.

¶18

[CRLW-502/2025]

¶19

(2 of 3)

¶20

Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is undergoing the sentence passed by the Competent Court and after serving sufficient sentence in the Central Jail, he made a prayer for shifting him to the Open Air Camp but his prayer was declined by the respondent vide order dated 08.01.2024. Aggrieved by the aforesaid order, the petitioner approached this Court by way of filing S.B. Criminal Writ Petition No. 1224/2024 and the said petition was allowed by this Court vide order dated 10.12.2024 and in pursuance of the aforesaid order, the petitioner was shifted to the Open Air Camp. Counsel submits that subsequently, the petitioner was shifted from the Open Air Camp to Central Jail only on the basis of an apprehension that in case, the petitioner is allowed to reside in the Open Air Camp, he may involve in other criminal activity. Counsel submits that there is no basis behind such assumption, hence under these circumstances, appropriate orders be passed for re-shifting the petitioner to Open Air Camp from the Central Jail.

¶21

Learned Public Prosecutor opposed the arguments raised by counsel for the petitioner and submitted that before shifting the petitioner to Open Air Camp, he got involved in some quarrel with the co-persons, that is why a decision was taken not to shift the petitioner in the Open Air Camp and this order was passed on 08.01.2024. Counsel submits that looking to the aforesaid conduct of the petitioner there are chances that he may commit the incident in future also in case, he shifted to the Open Air Camp, hence the instant petition filed by the petitioner be rejected.

¶22

Heard and considered the submissions made at Bar and perused the material available on record.

¶23

[CRLW-502/2025]

¶24

(3 of 3)

¶25

Perusal of the record indicates that no material has been placed on record by the respondent for raising such suspicious assumption against the petitioner that in case, he is ordered to be shifted in the Open Air Camp, he may commit the incident in future. Until and unless any report is registered against him with regard to the aforesaid allegations, the petitioner cannot be denied the benefit only on the basis of presumption. Unless there is concrete material available with the respondent to support the aforesaid view, the petitioner’s prayer for getting shifted to the Open Air Camp cannot be declined.

¶26

Counsel for the petitioner apprised this Court that after reshifting of the petitioner from the Open Air Camp to the Central Jail, he was granted the benefit of regular parole of 20 days and thereafter he remained on parole for the aforesaid period and surrendered before the Jail Authorities. Even during that period also, no untoward incident has occurred which would decline the petitioner’s prayer for getting him shifted to the Open Air Camp.

¶27

Considering the above facts of the case, the instant criminal writ petition stands allowed and the respondents are directed to pass an appropriate order for shifting the petitioner from the Central Jail, Dausa to the Open Air Camp.

¶28

(ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J

¶29

Ashu/181

Jitendra @ Jeetu S/O Late Shri Ramlal Meena v. the State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jitendra @ Jeetu S/O Late Shri Ramlal Meena v. the State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kailash Chand Jain S/O Shri Phool Chand Jain Vs State of Rajasthan

Kamal Singh Son of Ramkhiladi, Vs State of Rajasthan

Sanny Taneja S/O Shri Rajkumar Taneja, Vs State of Rajasthan

Gajraj Singh S/O Shri Kishanlal Vs State of Rajasthan

Sitaram Jat S/O Ramdhan Jat, Vs State of Rajasthan

Prashant Kumar S/O Shriniwas Vs the State of Rajasthan