Ramnanda Vs. State of Rajasthan

Ramnanda vs State of Rajasthan

Disposition Petition allowed Court Rajasthan Decided Jan 13, 2009

~3 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/769404

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/769404
Court: Rajasthan High Court
Judge: Narendra Kumar Jain and; Guman Singh, JJ.
Decided On: Jan 13, 2009
Subject: Criminal
Disposition: Petition allowed

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Constitution of India - Article 226-Rajasthan Prisoners (Release on Parole) Rules, 1958-Rule 9-Parole-When can be granted-First parole-It was said that application of parole of petitioner was rejected only on basis of adverse report of Superintendent of Police and Social Welfare Officer-However, said reports have no...

Key legal issue: Criminal
Outcome / disposition: Petition allowed

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Ramnanda

Respondent

State of Rajasthan

Legal References

Reported In: 2009(3)WLN138

Excerpt

constitution of india - article 226-rajasthan prisoners (release on parole) rules, 1958-rule 9-parole-when can be granted-first parole-it was said that application of parole of petitioner was rejected only on basis of adverse report of superintendent of police and social welfare officer-however, said reports have not placed on record and state is unable to support the adverse reports-held, petitioner be released on parole of 20 days. - motor vehicles act, 1988 [c.a. no. 59/1988]sections 163-a & 166; [r.m. lodha, shiv kumar sharma & ashok parihar, jj] award passed by tribunal under section 163-a nature of held, the award passed by tribunal under section 163-a of act under structured formula is a final award and once that award has been passed, no further award under chapter xii of m.v. act could be passed by the tribunal. the provisions contained in sections 163-a and 166 of act provide for two different modes but the two modes cannot simultaneously be invoked by the claimants. the claimant must opt/elect to go either for a proceeding under section 163-a or under section 166 of the m.v. act but not under both. the award under section 163-a is final and cannot be described as interim and no proceeding for compensation under section 166 can be undertaken once the award is declared under section 163-a. - 1. heard learned counsel for the state and examined the contents of letter petition as well as reply thereto filed by the state. however, during the course of arguments the learned counsel for the state is unable to support the adverse report of superintendent of police as well as social welfare officer......that ram nanda and nanda is one and same convict.3. the reply to writ petition shows that the application for parole of the petitioner was rejected only on the basis of adverse report of the superintendent of police and social welfare officer, dausa. however, during the course of arguments the learned counsel for the state is unable to support the adverse report of superintendent of police as well as social welfare officer. the same have also not been placed on record. as per rule 9 of the rajasthan prisoners (release on parole) rules, 1958, there are only two requirements, which are fulfilled in the present case for grant of first parole of 20 days to the convict.4. in view of above, the writ petition is allowed. it is directed that accused petitioner ram nanda @ nanda s/o kishan lal be released on first parole of 20 days on furnishing his personal bond in the sum of rs. 50,000/- (rs. fifty thousand) with two sureties of rs. 25,000/- (rs. twenty five thousand only) each to the satisfaction of the superintendent, central jail, jaipur. the other conditions will be imposed by the superintendent, central jail, jaipur as per rules.5. a copy of this order may be sent for compliance to the superintendent, central jail, jaipur.

Full Judgment

Narendra Kumar Jain, J.

1. Heard learned Counsel for the State and examined the contents of letter petition as well as reply thereto filed by the State.

2. The petitioner has preferred this parole writ petition for grant of first parole of 20 days. A notice to show cause was given and in response thereto, the respondents have filed their written-reply, wherein they have admitted the contents of the letter petition to the effect that petitioner has completed 1/4th of his sentence of imprisonment awarded by the trial Court and his conduct during custody in jail was satisfactory. It is relevant to mention that in the written reply, the respondents have mentioned that this parole writ petition has been preferred in the name of convict Ram Nanda, whereas as per history ticket of the petitioner, the name of convict has been entered as Nanda S/o Kishan Lal by caste Meena. However, during the course of arguments, the learned Counsel for the State admitted that the convict Ram Nanda is Nanda S/o Kishan Lal and there is no dispute about name of the petitioner. The respondents have also annexed Annexure-R/2, the application preferred by the petitioner in the name of Nand Ram, which was verified by Superintendent, Central Jail, Jaipur and he signed as Ram Nanda on the said application, therefore, there is no dispute that Ram Nanda and Nanda is one and same convict.

3. The reply to writ petition shows that the application for parole of the petitioner was rejected only on the basis of adverse report of the Superintendent of Police and Social Welfare Officer, Dausa. However, during the course of arguments the learned Counsel for the State is unable to support the adverse report of Superintendent of Police as well as Social Welfare Officer. The same have also not been placed on record. As per Rule 9 of the Rajasthan Prisoners (Release on Parole) Rules, 1958, there are only two requirements, which are fulfilled in the present case for grant of first parole of 20 days to the convict.

4. In view of above, the writ petition is allowed. It is directed that accused petitioner Ram Nanda @ Nanda S/o Kishan Lal be released on first parole of 20 days on furnishing his personal bond in the sum of Rs. 50,000/- (Rs. Fifty Thousand) with two sureties of Rs. 25,000/- (Rs. Twenty Five Thousand only) each to the satisfaction of the Superintendent, Central Jail, Jaipur. The other conditions will be imposed by the Superintendent, Central Jail, Jaipur as per rules.

5. A copy of this order may be sent for compliance to the Superintendent, Central Jail, Jaipur.

Same Court & Year Rajasthan · 2009 Same Parties Ramnanda vs State of Rajasthan Same Subject Criminal Same Judge Narendra Kumar Jain and; Guman Singh, JJ.

Criminal