- (1.) HEARD finally.
(2.) CONVICT /petitioner Bhanwarlal S/o Shri Ramchandra, has preferred this parole writ petition challenging the order dated 19.10.2012(Annexure-1) passed by respondents, whereby his application for grant of permanent parole, has been dismissed. Submission of the learned counsel for petitioner is that petitioner has already undergone actual 19 years of imprisonment and if remission is counted, then he has undergone about 23 years of imprisonment. He submitted that petitioner was earlier granted first and second parole of 20 days and 30 days respectively, and his conduct during parole period as well as in jail custody, was satisfactory, therefore, there was no reason for not allowing the application of petitioner for grant of permanent parole. He submitted that reason assigned by the State Parole Advisory Committee for rejecting the application, is flimsy in nature. He further submitted that only on the basis of adverse report of Superintendent of Police, application of petitioner has been rejected. He submitted that there is no supporting evidence in support of adverse report given by the Superintendent of Police, Tonk.
(3.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner also referred the order dated 23.07.2012 passed by the Division Bench of this Court in D.B. Civil Writ Petition(Parole) No.9574/2012- Suresh Vs. The State of Rajasthan and Ors., whereby this Court, in similar circumstances, allowed the parole writ petition and directed to release the convict on permanent parole, on furnishing personal and surety bonds. He, therefore, submitted that writ petition of petitioner may be allowed and the respondents may be directed to release the petitioner on permanent parole.;