RAHUL @ KRISHNADAS @ LALA VAISHNAV Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) An application for parole filed by the Petitioner/Convict has been rejected by the learned Executive Magistrate on behalf of the District Magistrate stating that the Superintendent of Police had not recommended his release on parole, against which writ petition has been preferred.

(2.) I have heard learned counsel for the parties and considered the rival contentions and gone through the records of the case.

(3.) Before examining the propriety of the order impugned, it is necessary to examine the Rules, known as Chhattisgarh Prisoner's Leave Rules, 1989 framed in exercise of the powers enumerated by Section 31 of the Prisoner's Act, 1900 (No.III of 1900). Rules 4, 5 and 6 of the said Rules, 1989 are relevant for the purpose, therefore, reproduced herein as under: