ASHOK KUMAR Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND ANR.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS petition has been filed for release of the petitioner on emergent parole under Rule 10A of the Rajasthan Prisoners Release on Parole Rules, 1958 (for short, the "Rules of 1958). Case of the petitioner is that he was operated for Kidney Stones. It is submitted that petitioner was earlier granted 1st, 2nd and 3rd parole for different periods but he never misused the liberty of parole. It is submitted that petitioner be granted emergent parole for 40 days to facilitate the petitioner to obtain best medical treatment at the hospital of his choice.

(2.) LEARNED Public Prosecutor has opposed the parole application and brought to the notice of this Court the certificate dated 14/6/2012 issued by the medical officer of Monilek Hospital and Research Centre, Jaipur stating that after the operation of the petitioner for removal of stones from the kidney, the petitioner was required to get the Stent removed after 45 days from the date of surgery for which purpose, there was however no need for admission of the petitioner in the hospital. The certificate shows that stitches were removed on 26/4/2012. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that in this view of the matter, therefore, it is not necessary that petitioner should be released on emergent parole.

(3.) RULE 10A of the Rules of 1958 provides for grant of release of a prisoner on emergent parole in four situations, which relate inter -alia to critical conditions obtaining in the family of the convict on account of illness of any of his close relations i.e. father, mother, wife, husband, children, brother or unmarried sister. Other situations in which emergent parole can be granted is death of any of the close relations referred to above or in situation of serious damage to health and property owing to natural calamity. Other conditions have also been incorporated under Rule 10 of the aforesaid rules but in none of them, case of the petitioner can be covered to warrant his release on emergent parole. I therefore do not find any merit in this parole petition, which is accordingly dismissed. It is however clarified that whenever petitioner needs medical attention, the jail authorities will ensure that petitioner is provided with requisite medical care at the hospital in the Jail or otherwise as and when necessary.