RISHIPAL Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner, a convicted prisoner undergoing sentence of imprisonment, seeks to issue writ of mandamus directing respondents to include the period of parole in the total period of undergone sentence and to refer his case to Advisory Board for consideration on merit under the provisions of Rajasthan Prisons (Shortening of Sentences) Rules, 1958 (for short `1958 Rules' ).

(2.) CONTEXTUAL facts depict that the petitioner was convicted for the offences under sections 302 read with 34 IPC to suffer imprisonment for life. Appeal against the judgment of trial Court was dismissed by the High Court on August 26, 1998 as well as the special leave petition was dismissed by the Apex Court on January 25, 1999. During the period of imprisonment the petitioner was released on parole respectively for 15 days, 32 days and 19 days. The petitioner claims that the period of parole be treated as sentence undergone and it should be counted with the period of imprisonment.

(3.) A Constitution Bench of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Sunil Fulchand Shah vs. Union of India (2000) 3 SCC 409, considered the distinction between `bail' and `parole' and indicated thus:- (Para 24) "bail and parole have different connotations in law. Bail is well understood in criminal jurisprudence and Chapter XXXIII of the Code of Criminal Procedure contains elaborate provisions relating to grant of bail. Bail is granted to a person who has been arrested in a non bailable offence or has been convicted of an offence after trial. The effect of granting bail is to release the accused from internment though the Court would still retain constructive control over him through the sureties. "