RAHUL SHRI VISHAMBHAR Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The instant writ petition is filed by convict-prisoner Rahul through his wife Smt. Brijesh Devi seeking emergent parole on ground of want of progeny under Rule 11 of the Rajasthan Prisons (Release On Parole) Rules, 2021 read with Article 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India. Petitioner was convicted for the offence under Ss. 363, 366 and 376 (3) of IPC and 3/4(2) of POCSO Act and sentenced to 20 years imprisonment vide order dtd. 13/6/2022 in Sessions Case No. 29/2021.

(2.) It is submitted that the petitioner has served more than two years of imprisonment with remission. The petition has been filed through petitioner's wife for releasing him on emergent parole, for want of progeny and conceiving child for the purpose of preservation of lineage, as per religious and cultural philosophies and for humanitarian aspects. The conduct of the petitioner is satisfactory and if not allowed to be released or parole, his rights under Article 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India, will be affected. Learned counsel has relied upon the Division Bench judgment of Nand Lal Vs. State and Ors.: DB. Cri. Writ Petition No. 10/2022, which has been upheld by the Hon'ble Apex Court, wherein the Division Bench of this Court observed that:-

(3.) Per contra, counsel for the State has opposed the present petition and submitted that the present petitioner was convicted under POCSO Act for offences that are grievous in nature. Learned counsel contends that if the petitioner is released on parole, it would adversely affect the society and there is a possibility of conflict/quarrel between the petitioner and the complainant. Learned counsel further submitted that in Rajasthan Prisons (Release On Parole) Rules, 2021, there is no provision for releasing the petitioner on emergent parole on the ground of want of progeny.