D.B. PAROLE PETITION NO. 7052/2013. Billu @ Shyam Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan .. D.B. PAROLE PETITION NO. 5475/2013. Smt. Lalita Vs. State of Rajasthan // 1 // 35 D.B. PAROLE PETITION NO. 7052/2013. Billu @ Shyam Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan .. 36 D.B. PAROLE PETITION NO. 5475/2013. Smt. Lalita Vs. State of Rajasthan .. Date of Order ::
24. h July 2013. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH MAHESHWARI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAY BISHNOI Mr. Kaluram Bhati, for the petitioners. Mr. K.R. Bishnoi, Government Counsel. <<>> BY THE COURT: These two petitions being related to the same convict-prisoner Billu @ Shyam Singh son of Ramesh Singh Meena and having been filed essentially seeking the same relief against the denial of permanent parole have been considered together; and are taken up for disposal by this common order. It is noticed from the facts surfacing on record that as on 11.06.2013, the prisoner concerned had actually served the sentence of imprisonment for a period of 19 years 01 month 4 days and has earned remission of over 6 years. It appears that earlier, a parole petition (No. 8345/2012) was filed on behalf of the prisoner for grant of permanent parole, which was disposed of by this Court on 03.10.2012 with directions to the authorities concerned for taking decision on his parole plea within a period of two months. It further D.B. PAROLE PETITION NO. 7052/2013. Billu @ Shyam Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan .. D.B. PAROLE PETITION NO. 5475/2013. Smt. Lalita Vs. State of Rajasthan // 2 // appears that the State Level Parole Committee, in its order dated 22.02.2013, allowed the parole application of the prisoner and ordered his release upon furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs. 50,000/- and two sureties in the same amount of Rs. 50,000/- each. However, the turn of events had been that on 03.03.2013, before he was actually released on parole, petitioner-prisoner was found to have absconded from the Open Air Camp, Bichchhwal and in that regard, an FIR No. 49/2013 was lodged at Police Station Bichchhwal. Moreover, on the same date, i.e., 03.03.2013, he was allegedly found gambling by the Officers of Police Station Sadar, Bikaner and accordingly, a case was registered under Section 3/4 RPGO. In view of the above turn of events, the State Government proceeded to cancel the order of grant of permanent parole to the petitioner-prisoner by its order dated 20.03.2013. The learned counsel Mr. Kaluram Bhati appearing for the prisoner concerned submits that so far the case under Section 224 IPC is concerned, the petitioner-prisoner was tried in Case No. 22/2013 in the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bikaner and by the judgment and order dated 19.07.2013, he has been awarded the sentence of imprisonment for a period of one month. It is submitted that the other case under Section 3/4 RPGO remains pending. The learned counsel submits that as a matter of fact, the petitioner has actually served the sentence for above 19 years and D.B. PAROLE PETITION NO. 7052/2013. Billu @ Shyam Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan .. D.B. PAROLE PETITION NO. 5475/2013. Smt. Lalita Vs. State of Rajasthan // 3 // as has also earned substantial remissions of over 6 years. His conduct in the jail had otherwise been satisfactory and he had indeed been transferred to Open Air Camp. It is submitted that if at all there has been found some slight indiscretion or short-coming in the conduct of the petitioner-prisoner, such act of indiscretion had been only after his case had been considered and he was granted permanent parole. It is submitted that for such the act of indiscretion, the petitioner has already been penalized and no useful purpose would be served with his further detention in the present case. The learned Government Counsel on the other hand has opposed the petitions and submitted that when there has been a misconduct on the part of the petitioner even before his release, the Government has not been unjustified in cancelling his order of release. After having given a thoughtful consideration to the rival submissions and having examined the record, even while finding some act of indiscretion on the part of the petitioner prisoner, we are of the view that his plea for permanent parole deserves reconsideration at this stage. It is apparent that on 22.02.2013, the case of the petitioner was duly considered with reference to the record and he was ordered to be released on permanent parole after furnishing personal bond and two sureties in the sum of Rs. 50,000/- each. The petitioner had otherwise been shifted to the Open Air Camp. D.B. PAROLE PETITION NO. 7052/2013. Billu @ Shyam Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan .. D.B. PAROLE PETITION NO. 5475/2013. Smt. Lalita Vs. State of Rajasthan // 4 // Obviously, his jail conduct had been satisfactory. As noticed, until 11.06.2013, the petitioner prisoner had actually served the sentence for a period above 19 years and did earn remission of more than 6 years. We are of the view that even if the petitioner had been indiscreet in his conduct, such short-coming cannot operate against him for all times to come so as to permanently debar him from permanent parole. In our view, his case deserves reconsideration and it goes without saying that if he is otherwise entitled, he could be put to any further terms and conditions, as deemed fit and proper by the authorities concerned. Therefore, these petitions are disposed of with directions to the authorities concerned to reconsider the case of the petitioner prisoner for grant of permanent parole, of course, with reference to the record and keeping in view the observations foregoing. It shall be expected of the authorities concerned to reconsider the case of the petitioner prisoner for grant of permanent parole and to take a final decision thereupon without delay, and preferably within a period of 90 days. (VIJAY BISHNOI), J.
(DINESH MAHESHWARI), J.
/CP Goyal/ /Mohan/ D.B. PAROLE PETITION NO. 7052/2013. Billu @ Shyam Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan .. D.B. PAROLE PETITION NO. 5475/2013. Smt. Lalita Vs. State of Rajasthan // 5 // D.B. PAROLE PETITION NO. 5475/2013. Smt. Lalita Vs. State of Rajasthan .. Date of Order ::
24. h July 2013. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH MAHESHWARI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAY BISHNOI Mr. Kaluram Bhati, for the petitioners. Mr. K.R. Bishnoi, Government Counsel. <<>> This petition stands disposed of with observations and directions [Vide common order made in D.B. Parole Petition No. 7052/2013 : Billu @ Shyam Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan] (VIJAY BISHNOI), J.
(DINESH MAHESHWARI), J.
/CP Goyal/ /Mohan/