KASHI RAM Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner, a prisoner, lodged in Central Jail, Sriganganagar has preferred this petition for writ seeking a direction to transfer him to Open Air Camp as prescribed under Rajasthan Prisoners (Open Air Camp) Rules, 1972. A challenge is also given by the petitioner to the constitutional validity of the provisions of Rule 3(a), 3(h), 3(j) and 3(m) of the Rules of 1972. The contention of the petitioner is that the Rules of 1972 were enacted with a view to encourage good conduct, satisfactory performance of work and a life of self -discipline among the convicts and further to provide these convicts with a pre -release, opportunity to learn social adjustment and economic self -dependence, but the impugned provisions in no manner having any nexus with the object sought to be achieved, and on the contrary have an effect adverse to the declared objects. As per reply to the writ petition submitted on behalf of the respondents so far as Rule 3(a) of the Rules is concerned no comment is required to be made in view of the law laid down by this Court in the case of Om Prakash v. State of Rajasthan, 2002(2) WLC 491. In the case aforesaid this Court while examining validity of Rule 14 of the Rajasthan Prisoners (Release on Parole) Rules, 1958 held as under:

(2.) RULE 3(a) of the Rules of 1972 is pari materia to Rule 14 aforesaid, and therefore, the reasons given to declare Rule 14 of the Rules of 1958 are applicable in present case too mutatis mutandis. In view of this position of law we are of the view that Rule 3(a) of the Rules of 1972 is bad being in violation of Article 14, 15 and 21 of the Constitution of India.

(3.) ACCORDINGLY , this petition for writ stands disposed of. Rule 3(a) of the Rules of 1972 is declared illegal being in violation of Article 14, 15 and 21 of the Constitution of India. The respondents are directed to consider case of the petitioner for transfer to Open Air Camp as per the Rules of 1972 while taking into consideration the law laid down by this Court in the cases of Hajara v. State and Ors., Ratna v. State and Ors. and Kishna and Anr. v. State and Ors. (supra). The consideration in the terms above is required to be made within a period of two months from today.