SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2021 Supreme(Raj) 23

MAHENDAR KUMAR GOYAL
Ghanshyam – Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan – Respondent


Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : Vishram Prajapati
For the Respondents: F.R. Meena, P.P.

ORDER :

Mahendar Kumar Goyal, J.

1. This parole petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India with the prayer that the order dated 15.09.2020 issued pursuant to the meeting of Permanent Parole Committee dated 14.12.2019 whereby the petitioner has been denied permanent parole on the ground of non availing of three regular paroles, be quashed.

2. It has been submitted in the petition that vide judgment dated 12.12.1991 passed by the trial Court, the petitioner was convicted for the offence under Section 376 IPC and sentenced to undergo 7 years imprisonment with fine.

3. It has further been submitted that the petitioner had served 5 years 6 months and 27 days of imprisonment upto 23.10.2020 out of the total sentence of 7 years. He was released on two paroles of 20 and 30 days respectively by the Parole Committee. In this way, he has served a substantive part of his sentence. He never misused the liberty of parole and on completion of the parole period he surrendered before the concerned authority on due date. During incarceration, the conduct of the petitioner has remained absolutely good and he is continuously getting remission in jail on the basis of his good co

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top