- (1.) In this parole petition, the petitioner/convict has prayed for issuing a direction to the respondents for grant of benefit of state remission in pursuance of orders dated 30.03.2012 and 21.02.2014 for six months because he is serving for life imprisonment for the offences punishable under Section 364A, 387, 347, 324 and 120B of IPC imposed against him by the Additional District Judge (FT) No.1, Udaipur, in Session Case No.95/2007 vide judgment dated 01.05.2009.
(2.) In this case, Mr. S.S. Gour, Advocate was appointed as amicus curiae to assist the Court. Learned Amicus Curiae submit that vide order dated 11.05.2016, the petitioner has been denied benefit of remission of sentence on the ground that as per orders dated 30.03.2012 and 21.02.2014, the said remission cannot be granted to those convict(s) punished under Section 120B, 224, 377, 396, 498 -A, 466, 468, 469, 471 to 474, 366, 366 -A, 368 -B, 372, 373, 489 -A, 489 -B and 489 -C of IPC, however, Section 120B of IPC is not an independent offence. Therefore, if a convict is punished with the aid of Section 120B of IPC for the offences u/s 224, 377, 396, 498 -A, 466, 468, 469, 471 to 474, 366, 366 -A, 368 -B, 372, 373, 489 -A, 489 -B and 489 -C of IPC, but admittedly the petitioner was convicted for the offences u/s 364A, 387, 347 and 324 read with Section 120B of IPC. Thus, upon wrong interpretation of aforesaid orders, the state remission has wrongly been denied to him. It is thus prayed that the respondents may kindly be directed to grant remission in pursuance of orders issued by the State Government on 30.03.2012 and 21.02.2014.
(3.) On the other hand, learned Government Counsel submits that there is no force in the arguments of learned amicus curiae because Section 120B has been specifically included in both the orders by the Government of Rajasthan, and on account of such disqualification, the grant of state remission has rightly been denied to the petitioner/convict.;