SURESH Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS writ petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking release on permanent parole on the ground that he has already served 19 years during which period the petitioner as per averments made in para No.7 of the writ petition, the petitioner has availed regular parole on seven occasions of 20, 30 and 40 days. Last period of parole availed was from 14.5.2011 to 22.6.2011 and the petitioner surrendered before the jail authorities in time and nothing adverse was reported against the petitioner while he was on parole. Earlier, the petitioner approached this court by means of D.B. Civil Writ Petition (Parole) No.17554/2011, Suresh S/o late Shri Johri Lal v/s State of Rajasthan and Others which was decided by this court on 14.12.2011 directing the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner afresh in the light of the decision of this court in Suraj Giri's case. The respondents were directed to take the decision in the matter on or before 31.3.2012. The petitioner has annexed the order dated 15.6.2012 Annexure-3 which shows that the case of the petitioner was considered and rejected by the respondents. The only reason given is that the Deputy Commissioner of Police, Jaipur City (North) has not recommended the case of the petitioner for his release on permanent parole on the ground that in case the petitioner is released on permanent parole, there would be dis-satisfaction amongst the family of the victim. Apart from the above, no other ground has been given for rejection of the application.

(2.) WE find from the order dated 9.8.2011 Annexure-1 which has been filed by the petitioner, the minutes of the meeting of the Advisory Committee for release of petitioner on permanent parole that the brother of the petitioner Gopal S/o Shri Johri Lal has already been released on permanent parole by the Advisory Committee on furnishing personal bond in the amount of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties in the amount of Rs.50,000/- each, and the petitioner's brother Gopal Lal is already on permanent parole in pursuance of the aforesaid order dated 9.8.2011. It is not a case of the respondents that Gopal Lal, brother of the petitioner has in any manner misused the liberty granted to him. This fact has at all been considered by the Advisory Committee while taking decision vide order dated 15.6.2012. Both Suresh and Gopal Lal were convicted in the same case and the petitioner has spent about 19 years or more in custody. We are not satisfied with the reasons given by the Advisory Committee. More over the Advisory Committee had not taken into consideration the fact that the petitioner had earlier on seven occasions have been released on regular parole of 20, 30 and 40 days as well as emergent parole on two occasions. The petitioner has surrendered before the jail authorities in time and no adverse report was given against the petitioner for the period while he was on parole. The order of the Advisory Committee is contradictory as it has granted permanent parole to Gopal and refused it to the petitioner. The Social Welfare Officer has not given any adverse report against the petitioner as per nominal roll but recommended his case.