MAHESH NATH Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ADMIT.

(2.) AT the request of the learned counsel for the State, the writ petition was heard finally and is being disposed of.

(3.) THE convict-petitioner has preferred this parole Writ Application for grant of first parole of 20 days. A notice to show cause was given to the respondent and, in response thereto, the respondent has filed a written-reply to the writ application. The respondent has admitted that the petitioner has completed 1/4th of his sentence of imprisonment as he has remained in custody for 7 years 5 months 18 days including the remission period as on 20th december, 2008; his conduct during his custody in Jail is also stated to be satisfactory. It has further been replied that the case of the petitioner was put before the District Parole advisory Committee in its meeting held on 6th june, 2007, but, in view of the fact that the necessary report/comments were not received, therefore, the application was kept pending for consideration in the next meeting. It has further been mentioned in the reply that the petitioner moved another application, which was again forwarded by the Jail Superintendent vide letter dated 9th May, 2008 to the District magistrate, Baran, for consideration as per the relevant Rules but the minutes of the meeting of the District Parole Advisory Committee has not been received as yet. It appears from the reply filed on behalf of the State that either the application filed by the petitioner has not been considered since 2007 or in case the same has been considered the result thereof has not been communicated to the Jail Superintendent. From the reply to the writ petition it is also not clear as to whether any meeting of District parole Advisory Committee has been convened after 9th May, 2008, or not.