MANISH DIXIT Vs. DIRECTOR GENERAL PRISONS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS writ petition has been filed by the petitioner Manish Dixit who is undergoing the sentence awarded to him in Sessions Case No. 158/1994 having being convicted for offences under Sections 302, 397 and 364 I. P. C. and 7/25 (1) (a) of the Arms Act. The petitioner was sentenced to life imprisonment for offence under Section 302 I. P. C. and lesser sentence for the other offences and at present he is lodged in Central Jail, Jaipur.

(2.) THE petitioner in this writ petition has sought the relief that in accordance with the provisions contained in the Rajasthan Prisoners Open Air Camp Rules, 1972 (hereinafter referred to as ``the Rules of 1972''), he is entitled to be sent to the Open Air Camp at Sanganer and he seeks a direction for being sent to the said Open Air Camp. THE learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was taken in the custody on 12. 07. 1994. He has already served the sentence of seven years for the offence under Section 397 I. P. C. yet he has been wrongly denied being sent to the Open Air Camp at Sanganer in terms of Rule 3 of the Rules of 1972. THE learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that in accordance with the Rule 6 of the Rules of 1972, though the petitioner's name has been empanelled at Serial No. 132 in the order of seniority, he has been wrongly denied being sent to the Open Air Camp at Sanganer.

(3.) A perusal of the above Rule goes to show that it has been provided that ordinarily the above class of prisoners shall not be eligible for being sent to the Open Air Camp. Under clause (g) of the above Rule where a prisoner whose conduct in the jail is not good, has been considered to be ineligible for being sent to Open Air Camp. In the instant case, the Advisory Committee, as per its finding recorded vide Annexure R/3 has come to the conclusion that during the period while the petitioner was released on parole, his conduct was not good. The said finding have been arrived at on the basis of the material available with the Committee and we find no reason to interfere with the said finding. The Committee constituted under the Rules is the authority as per the law to decide the cases on the basis of the recommendations of Superintendent/deputy Superintendent, In- Charge of the Jail, as well as subject to the availability of the accommodation from time to time in the Open Air Camp. The Advisory Committee on the consideration of the material placed before it has arrived at a decision that on account of the fact that conduct of the accused was not good during the period while he was released on parole, therefore, his case was not a fit case for being sent to the Open Air Camp. As per clause (g) of Rule 3 of the Rules of 1972, a prisoner whose conduct is not good has been considered ineligible.