Kamal Singh Amar Singh vs State And Ors

The convict petitioner has preferred the present writ petition against the order dated 28.11.2019, whereby the case of the convict for releasing him on permanent parole has been rejected.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that vide judgment dated 21/10/2016 passed by learned Sessions Judge No.1, Chittorgarh in Session Case No. 12/2014, the petitioner was convicted and sentenced for the offence under Sections 342/34, 366/34, 325/34, 307/34, 354/34, 504/34, 506/34 IPC and to undergo sentence for seven years rigorous imprisonment. He further submits that out of the seven years sentence, the convict petitioner has already undergone six years imprisonment including  remission. The conduct of the convict is good and no offence was conducted while he was released on first, second parole. He has relied upon a judgment passed by a Coordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Narayan Lal vs. State & Ors (S.B. Civil Parole Writ Petition No. 9577/2014, decided on 04/02/2015), S.B. Criminal Writ Petition No. 75/2020 (Santosh Kumar Vs. State &Ors), S.B. Criminal Writ Petition No. 78/2020 (Sagarmal Vs. State &Ors) In reply to the writ petition, it is stated that conduct of the prisoner has been found to be satisfactory.

I have considered rival submissions of the parties. The fact that the petitioner has not misused the liberty of enlargement on first and second parole as also the fact that no offence was committed by him during the aforesaid period, fortifies that the conduct of the convict petitioner during last six years is not questionable.

Section 9 of the Rajasthan Prisoners Release on Parole Rules, 1958 reads as under:-

"A prisoner, who has completed with remission, if any, (one- fourth) of his sentence and subject to good conduct in the Jail, may be released on 1st parole for 20 days including days of journey to home and back, and for 30 days on 2nd parole provided his behaviour has been good during the 1st parole and for 40 days on third parole provided his behavoiur has been good during second parole. If during the third parole also the prisoner has behaved well and his character has been exceedingly well and if the prisoner's conduct has been such that he is not likely to relapse into crime, his case may be recommended to the Government through the State Committee for permanent release on parole on such conditions as deemed fit by the Superintendent of Jail and the District Magistrate concerned; the chief condition among them being that if the prisoner while on parole commits any offence or abets, directly or indirectly, commission of any offence, he has to undergo the unexpired portion of the sentence in addition to any sentence imposed upon him by reason of such an offence. In cases the permanent release on parole is rejected the prisoner will be eligible for release on parole for 40 days every year subject to the same conditions for the remaining period of his sentence."

In these circumstances, the State Parole Committee, while not recommending the case of the convict-prisoner for his release on permanent parole, was not justified on the ground mentioned in the meeting dated 08.11.2019. No other reason has been stated for not recommending the case of the petitioner for releasing him on permanent parole. Further, the convict-prisoner has already availed two regular paroles.

In view of the above, this petition for writ deserves to be allowed and is hereby allowed. The convict-prisoner Kamal Singh @ Amar Singh be released on permanent parole provided he furnishes a personal bond of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh) with two sureties of Rs.50,000/- each to the satisfaction of the Superintendent, Central Jail, Udaipur with the usual conditions enshrined in Rule 9 of the Rules and as may be prescribed by the concerned Superintendent of Jail.

A copy of this order be sent to the Superintendent, Central Jail, Udaipur.