Chandan at Changil Vs. the State of Rajasthan and ors.

Chandan at Changil vs The State of Rajasthan and ors.

Type Court Judgment Court Rajasthan Decided Aug 10, 2011

~1 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/920722

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/920722
Court: Rajasthan High Court
Judge: Narendra Kumar Jain, J.
Decided On: Aug 10, 2011
Case Number: S.B. CIVIL MISC. WRIT PETITION(PAROLE) NO.8566 of 2011
Subject: Criminal

Case Summary

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

Criminal

Key legal issue: Criminal
Acts & sections: Rajasthan Prisoners Release on Parole Rules, 1958 - Rule 13

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Chandan at Changil

Advocate Ms. Gayatri Rathore, Adv

Respondent

The State of Rajasthan and ors.

Advocate Mr. Mahendra Meena. Adv

Legal References

Acts: Rajasthan Prisoners Release on Parole Rules, 1958 - Rule 13

Excerpt

1. heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. convict-petitioner has preferred this parole writ petition for grant of second parole of 30 days. 3. a notice to show cause was given and in response thereto, the respondents have filed their reply contending that conduct of petitioner during jail custody was not satisfactory and he was awarded jail punishment also. 4. i have considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties. 5. as per the provisions of the rajasthan prisoners release on parole rules, 1958 (for short 'the rules of 1958'), it is a pre-condition that before filing an application or releasing the convict-petitioner on parole, his conduct in jail custody should be satisfactory. 6. in the present case, there is report of jail superintendent that conduct of petitioner is not satisfactory. in addition to it, it is also reported that petitioner was awarded jail punishment. even otherwise, as per rule 13 of the rules of 1958, convict-petitioner cannot claim parole as a matter of right. 7. in these circumstances, i do not find any force in this writ petition and the same is, accordingly, dismissed.

Full Judgment

1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. Convict-petitioner has preferred this parole writ petition for grant of second parole of 30 days.

3. A notice to show cause was given and in response thereto, the respondents have filed their reply contending that conduct of petitioner during jail custody was not satisfactory and he was awarded jail punishment also.

4. I have considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties.

5. As per the provisions of the Rajasthan Prisoners Release on Parole Rules, 1958 (for short 'the Rules of 1958'), it is a pre-condition that before filing an application or releasing the convict-petitioner on parole, his conduct in jail custody should be satisfactory.

6. In the present case, there is report of Jail Superintendent that conduct of petitioner is not satisfactory. In addition to it, it is also reported that petitioner was awarded jail punishment. Even otherwise, as per Rule 13 of the Rules of 1958, convict-petitioner cannot claim parole as a matter of right.

7. In these circumstances, I do not find any force in this writ petition and the same is, accordingly, dismissed.

Same Court & Year Rajasthan · 2011 Same Parties Chandan at Changil vs The State of Rajasthan and ors. Same Subject Criminal Same Judge Narendra Kumar Jain, J. Acts & Sections Rajasthan Prisoners Release on Parole Rules, 1958 - Rule 13