- (1.) This petition for parole has been filed by the accused petitioner with a prayer that the order dated 19.10.2011 passed by the District Parole Advisory Committee, Sikar be quashed and set aside. Further it has prayed that he may be released on regular parole for a period of 30 days.
(2.) The accused petitioner, herein, has been convicted by the learned Additional District Judge (Special Judge), (Women Atrocities and Dowry Cases), Jaipur City, Jaipur vide his judgment dated 24.8.2006 in Sessions Case No.16/2005 for the offences u/s 498-A, 304-B and 302 IPC and sentenced for life imprisonment. Thereafter the accused petitioner preferred an appeal (D.B. Criminal Appeal No.945/2006) before the High Court and the same is still pending adjudication.
(3.) The learned counsel for the accused petitioner has submitted that the District Parole Advisory Committee, Sikar has erred in passing the impugned order dated 19.10.2011. He has submitted that the mother of the accused petitioner is ill and as such he is entitled for grant of second parole. It is also submitted that the accused petitioner was granted first regular parole on 20.7.2009 and his conduct during the said period was satisfactory. The learned counsel has submitted that even if no valid reason is given by an accused for proceeding on regular parole, he is entitled for the same under the Parole Rules of 1958. In support of the submission, he has placed reliance on the case of Ramji Lal @ Ramjya v/s State of Raj. & Ors, 2007 4 WLC(Raj) 507.;