MEGHARAM Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Mr. Bhati, learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the learned District Level Parole Committee, Nagaur, has committed an error of law in rejecting petitioner's application for first parole under the Rajasthan Prisoners Release on Parole Rules, 1958 (herein referred to as "the rules of 1958).

(2.) While highlighting that it is petitioner's statutory right to get first parole, learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that reasons given by the learned District Level Parole Committee, Jodhpur are not relevant, particularly when the Superintendent of Jail, Jodhpur as well as the Probation and Prison Welfare Officer Social Justice and Empowerment Department, Jaisalmer have given opinions in favour of the release of the petitioner on parole. Only the Superintendent of Police, Jaisalmer has given unfavourable opinion, citing reasons that the release of the petitioner on parole can disturb the law and order and pose a danger to the life of the victim and her father.

(3.) Mr. Rajpurohit, learned Deputy Government Advocate opposed the grant of parole, contending that the petitioner is serving a sentence pursuant to his conviction under the provisions of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (hereinafter referred to as Rs.POCSO Act'). Since he has committed grave offence of sexual assault on a minor girl, he should not be released on parole. It was argued that releasing the convict-petitioner on parole would have a negative bearing on the social and psychological well-being of the victim, whose residence is just adjacent to convict-petitioner's house.