1. This petition with the prayer for grant of emergency parole to the convict-prisoner Asu Ram son of Shri Balla Ram came to be filed by the prisoner's wife on 14 05 2012 with the submissions that the prisoner's mother had expired on 24.04.2012. It has been pointed out that the prisoner had earlier availed the parole under the orders dated 25.03.2009, 26.05.2010 and 20.10.2011 without any cause of complaint. It has also been submitted in this petition that the prisoner's case for emergency parole was not being considered by the Superintendent. Central Jail, Jodhpur with reference to an order dated 23.06.2011 (Annex.1) as issued by the Government in its Home Department.

2. On the matter being taken up for consideration today, the learned Government Counsel has pointed out that the District Magistrate concerned has passed an order on 22.05.2012 granting 15 days' emergency parole to the prisoner Asu Ram. A copy of the order dated 22.05.2012 has been placed before us for perusal. which is taken on record.

3. For the necessary order granting emergency parole having been passed by the concerned District Magistrate, this petition could only be considered in-fructuous; and ordinarily, we would have closed the matter with these observations but then, it appears expedient and necessary that the said wholly unjustified and unauthorised order dated 23.06.2011, which has been commented adversely by this Court in the past, be annulled while impressing upon the authorities to act strictly in accordance with law.

4. In the matters of the present nature, of the prayer for grant of emergency parole, usually the orders, granting or refusing the emergency parole, are urgently required to be passed because any postponement of the matter may not serve the purpose. This has resulted in the position that despite this Court having made observations against the legality of said order dated 23.06.2011, the authorities concerned have chosen to ignore the observations of this Court with impunity because almost in all such cases, the cause for emergent parole, by its very nature, ceased to remain alive for long and hence, final pronouncement was not made about invalidity of the said order.

5. It appears apposite to refer to an order dated 24.01.2012 as passed in Parole Petition No.351/2012 wherein, even while declining the prayer for emergency parole, we had noticed the contents of the said order dated 23.06 2011 and found them prima facie not in conformity with the provisions as contained in Rule 10A of the Rajasthan Prisoners Release on Parole Rules, 1958 ('the Rules') while observing as under:

"One aspect of the matter relating to the order dated 23.06.2011 appears calling for comments. Rule 10A of the Rules has been reproduced hereinabove and it is but apparent that in the said Rule, the power and authority is vested in the Superintendent of Jail concerned for grant of parole for 7 days. The State Government in its Home Department has proceeded to issue the said questioned order dated 23.06.2011 that reads as under:

"jktLFkku fiztulZ fjyht vku iSjksy :Yl] 1958 ds fu;e 10(,) ds vUrxZr 1- fdlh cUnh ds utnhdh fj'rsnkj ;Fkk ekrk&firk] ifr&ifRu] cPps] HkkbZ ,oa fookfgr cgu ds xaHkhj :i ls chekj gksus 2- ,sls utnhdh fj'rsnkj dh e'R;q 3- izkd'frd vkink ls tu&/ku dks xaHkhj uqdlku 4- canh ds Lo;a dh] mlds iq= vFkok iq=h ds fookg rFkk canh ds ekrk&firk thfor u gksus dh fLFkfr easa cUnh ds HkkbZ cgu ds fookg ij] fdlh canh ds 7 fnol ds vkdfLed iSjksy ij fjgk djus gsrq v/kh{kd dkjxkj izk/khd'r gSA jkT; ljdkj ds /;ku esa vk;k gS fd v/kh{kd dkjkxkj }kjk fu;eksa ds ifjizs{; gSA vkikr iSjksy ds izdj.kksa esa iwjs rF;ksa dh iqf"V djok;s fcuk ,oa bu ij xaHkhjrk ls i;kZIr fopkj fd;s fcuk gh cafn;ksa dks vkdfLed iSjksy Lohd'r dj fn;s tkrs gSa] ftlls fu;eksa dh ;Fkksfpr ikyuk esa dk;Zokgh ugha gks ikrhA vr% ;g fu.kZ; fy;k x;k gS fd vfxze vkns'kksa rd v/kh{kd dkjxkj ds Lrj ls cafn;ksa dks vkikr iSjksy Lohd'r ugha fd;s tkosa rFkk vkikr iSjksy ds vkosnu rRijrk ls egkfuns'k