GIRDHARI SINGH Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petition at hand presents a very sorry state of affairs. The convict-petitioner's mother expired on 9/3/2022. An application for interim parole was filed on behalf of the petitioner to the Superintendent, Central Jail, Bikaner on 10/3/2022. But it was not decided for the purported reason that the prayer in the application was for grant of 15 days' emergent parole. The Superintendent, Central Jail, Bikaner reportedly forwarded the application to the District Collector, Bikaner, who remitted it back to the Superintendent, Central Jail, Bikaner for passing appropriate order. Nearly a month had passed since the petitioner's mother expired, where after he moved the instant writ petition.

(2.) While issuing notices on 8/4/2022, an oral direction was given to the learned GA-cum-AAG that the emergent parole (application of the petitioner should be decided, where after, he has been released on emergent parole.

(3.) This Court has time and again directed the jail as well as parole authorities to remain vigilant while deciding the emergent parole applications and to ensure that orders are passed thereupon within 7 days of presentation. Now under Rule 23 of the Rajasthan Prisoners Release on Parole Rules, 2021, an application for emergent parole is required to be decided within 4 days of presentation. Apparently, the Superintendent, Central Jail, Bikaner as well as District Collector, Bikaner have acted in contempt of this Courts' directions as also in gross non-compliance of Rule 23 of the Rules of 2021.