SHARMA, J. - (1.) THE petitioner, who is confined in Central Jail Jaipur seeks release on second parole under Rule 9 of the Rajasthan Prisoners Release on Parole Rules, 1958 (for short `parole Rules' ). Since no reply has been filed by the respondents despite several opportunities, we proceed to decide the petition on the basis of material on record.
(2.) THE petitioner, who was convicted and sentenced under Section 302 IPC on July 31, 1997, was released on first parole by the District Parole Committee. THE application of the petitioner for releasing him on second parole has been dismissed on June 30, 2004 by the Parole Committee on the ground that police report was adverse against him. In the matters where the High Court is in seizin of the appeals of the prisoners, following directions have been issued in writ petition No. 5000/2004 on September 14, 2004:- (i) It shall be the duty of Superintendent Jail to make an endorsement about the details of pendency of the criminal appeal, before forwarding the application to the District Magistrate. (ii) If the District Magistrate takes decision to further forward the application to the Parole Committee, the information shall necessarily be sent forthwith to the Deputy Registrar (Judicial) of the High Court for enclosing the same with the pending appeal of the prisoner. (iii) The decision taken by the Parole Committee shall also be forwarded to the High Court without any delay. (iv) In the event of granting emergent parole it shall be the duty of superintendent Jail to immediately transmit copy of the order to the Deputy Registrar (Judicial) of the High Court for appending the same in pending appeal. We have come across many such orders of the Parole Committee whereby applications of the prisoners for the release on parole were not considered properly. We therefore deem it appropriate to draw necessary guidelines after scanning Rules 9 and 11 of the Parole Rules. Rule 9 of the Parole Rules provides as under:- `rule 9. Parole period:- A prisoner, who has completed with remission, if any, (one fourth) of his sentence and subject to good conduct in the jail, may be released on 1st parole for 20 days including days of journey to home and back, and for 30 days on 2nd parole, provided his behaviour has been good during the 1st parole and for 40 days on 3rd parole, provided his behaviour has been good during the 2nd parole. If during the 3rd parole also the prisoner has behaved well and his character has been exceedingly well and if the prisoner's conduct has been such that he is not likely to relapse into crime, his case may be recommended to the Government through the (State Committee) for permanent release on parole on such conditions as deemed fit by the Superintendent Jail and the District Magistrate concerned; the chief condition among them being that if the prisoner while on parole commits any offence or abets, directly or indirectly, commission of any offence, he has to undergo the the unexpired portion of the sentence in addition to any sentence imposed upon him by reason of such an offence. In case the permanent release on parole is rejected, the prisoner will be eligible for release on parole for 40 days every years subject to the same condition for the remaining period of his sentence. (Provided that cases of prisoners who have been sentenced to imprisonment for life, for an offence for which death penalty is one of the punishments provided by law or who have been sentenced to death but this sentence has been commuted under Section 433 Code of Criminal Procedure into one of the imprisonment shall not be placed before the State Committee for permanent release on parole unless he has served 14 years of imprisonment excluding remission, but including the period of detention passed during enquiry, investigation or trial. Such prisoners may be released on parole for 40 days every year for the remaining period of their sentence subject to the conditions stated above.) It is evident from Rule 9 that a prisoner who completed with remission one fourth of his sentence and subject to good conduct in jail, may be released on parole. It is no where mentioned that adverse police report can be made basis to reject the application. Even if the Parole Committee thinks it proper to consider the police report and on consideration of the said report finds that if the prisoner is released on parole, breach of parole conditions may occur in that eventuality a direction under Rule 11 of Parole Rules may be issued that the prisoner shall refrain under the supervision of a guardian.
(3.) IN Paras Ram vs. State of Rajasthan (1), it was indicated that the release of a convict can not be refused merely on ipse dixit of police report. Coming to the facts of the instant case we find that the petitioner while remained on first parole, did not flout the parole conditions. The conduct of the petitioner in the jail has throughout been good and the Social Welfare Officer has also recommended the release of the petitioner on second parole. We are therefore of the opinion that the petitioner may be released on second parole and the order dated June 30, 2004 of the Parole Committee qua the petitioner deserves to be set aside. For these reasons, we allow the petition and set aside the order dated June 30, 2004 of the Parole Committee so far it relates to the petitioner. We direct Superintendent, Central Jail, Jaipur to release the petitioner on second parole under Rule 9 of the Parole Rules subject to just and proper conditions which may be determined by him. We also direct that the petitioner shall remain under supervision of a guardian appointed under Rule 11 of the Parole Rules. Copies of this order may be sent to the District Magistrate and the Superintendent, Central Jail, Jaipur. A copy of this order shall be enclosed with the pending criminal appeal of the petitioner. . ;