KRISHAN KUMAR Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ANOTHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) INSTANT petition has been filed by the petitioner who is serving life sentence in Central Jail, Jaipur. The petitioner was convicted and sentenced by the Ld. Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track) Jhunjhunu vide judgment dt. 28.8.2002 in Sessions Case No. 51/2001 (103/2001) whereby he was convicted u/s. 460, 395, 397, 398 IPC, against which the (petitioner preferred DB Civil Writ Petition No. 5813/2013 which has been disposed of by this Court. As per nominal roll which has been enclosed by the respondent on record issued from the office of Superintendent, Central Jail, Jaipur Ann. R/2, the petitioner has undergone 14 years 6 months and 7 days and his jail conduct was not found to be satisfactory for the reason that for the period November 2012 to 11.3.2013 he remained absent from the jail workshop and from 12.3.2013 to 31.3.2013 he did not work.

(2.) AS alleged in the petition, the petitioner submitted application before the concerned competent authority on 30.11.2012 for his admission to open air camp under the Scheme of Rules 1972 but when no action was taken by the competent authority the petitioner preferred DB Civil Writ Petition No. 5813/2013 which came to decided vide order dt. 16.4.2013 with the direction to the respondent to consider and decide his case on its own merits for admission to open air camp. The case of the petitioner, thereafter was considered by the Advisory Committee but taking note of his nature of conviction for the offence u/s. 395, 397, 398 and his jail conduct, the committee was of the unanimous view that he is not entitled for admission to open air camp and accordingly rejected the application.

(3.) AFTER notice of the present petition came to be served, reply has been filed by the respondent and it has been averred that the petitioner is serving imprisonment in Central Jail, Jaipur and has served the sentence of 14 years 6 months 7 days but his jail conduct was not found satisfactory and he is resident of District Rewadi, Haryana and taking note of the overall view the petitioner was not considered eligible for admission to open air camp.