Jugata Ram Vs. State of Raj

Jugata Ram vs State of Raj

Type Court Judgment Court Rajasthan Jodhpur Decided Jan 10, 2013

~3 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/973316

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/973316
Court: Rajasthan Jodhpur High Court
Decided On: Jan 10, 2013
Subject: Education

Case Summary

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

Education

Key legal issue: Education

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Jugata Ram

Respondent

State of Raj

Excerpt

.....referred to as 'the rules of 1958'), the application for grant of parole is required to be submitted to the superintendent of concerned jail, who is required to forward the same for consideration to the district parole advisory committee along with necessary information of the accused. thereafter, the application is considered by the district parole advisory committee.7. at this stage, we are not aware as to whether contents of the application are correct or not, whether any appeal is pending or not, whether conduct of petitioner during jail custody is satisfactory or not? initialy, the accused should first approach the statutory authority and in case, his/her application is rejected, then only he/she can prefer a writ petition before this court, challenging the order of district parole advisory committee.8. in these circumstances, we are not inclined to entertain this petition and the same is, accordingly, dismissed.9. however, a liberty is granted to convict to move an application for grant of parole to the superintendent of the concerned jail, who is directed to forward the same for consideration to the district parole advisory {3} db crim. writ pet(parole).13685/2012 committee and the committee is also directed to consider and decide the application, in accordance with law.10. registry is directed to send a copy of this order for information to convict and for compliance to the superintendent of the concerned jail as well as the concerned district magistrate. (vijay bishnoi),j.(narendra kumar jain),j./kkc/ certificate: all corrections made in the judgment/order have been incorporated in the judgment/order being emailed. kamlesh kumar p.a.

Full Judgment

{1} DB CRIM. WRIT PET(PAROLE).13685/2012 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR O R D E R D.B.CRIMINAL WRIT(PAROLE) PETITION NO.13685/2012 JUGTARAM Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN DATE:10.01.2013 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NARENDRA KUMAR JAIN HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAY BISHNOI By Post. Mr. K.R. Bishnoi, Addl. Government Advocate, for the respondent. **** A copy of this letter petition has been supplied to the learned Additional Government Advocate.

2. Heard finally.

3. Convict-petitioner Jugtaram S/o Pabudan, has preferred this parole writ petition, by post, from jail for grant of first parole of 20 days.

4. It appears that letter petition has been sent directly to this Court, without approaching the District Parole Advisory Committee first.

5. We have considered the contents of the application and the submissions of the learned Additional Government Advocate.

6. As per the provisions of Rajasthan Prisoners Release on Parole Rules, 1958 {2} DB CRIM. WRIT PET(PAROLE).13685/2012 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules of 1958'), the application for grant of parole is required to be submitted to the Superintendent of concerned Jail, who is required to forward the same for consideration to the District Parole Advisory Committee along with necessary information of the accused. Thereafter, the application is considered by the District Parole Advisory Committee.

7. At this stage, we are not aware as to whether contents of the application are correct or not, whether any appeal is pending or not, whether conduct of petitioner during jail custody is satisfactory or not? Initialy, the accused should first approach the statutory authority and in case, his/her application is rejected, then only he/she can prefer a writ petition before this Court, challenging the order of District Parole Advisory Committee.

8. In these circumstances, we are not inclined to entertain this petition and the same is, accordingly, dismissed.

9. However, a liberty is granted to convict to move an application for grant of parole to the Superintendent of the concerned jail, who is directed to forward the same for consideration to the District Parole Advisory {3} DB CRIM. WRIT PET(PAROLE).13685/2012 Committee and the Committee is also directed to consider and decide the application, in accordance with law.

10. Registry is directed to send a copy of this order for information to convict and for compliance to the Superintendent of the concerned jail as well as the concerned District Magistrate. (VIJAY BISHNOI),J.

(NARENDRA KUMAR JAIN),J.

/KKC/ Certificate: All corrections made in the judgment/order have been incorporated in the judgment/order being emailed. KAMLESH KUMAR P.A.

Same Court & Year Rajasthan Jodhpur · 2013 Same Parties Jugata Ram vs State of Raj Same Subject Education