Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH
SANDEEP MEHTA, PRAKASH GUPTA, JJ.
Fazlur Rehman Sufi and Ors. – Appellants
Versus
State of Rajasthan and Ors. – Respondents
D.B. Criminal Writ Petition Nos. 515, 542, 609 and 848/2020
Decided On : 04-02-2021
Parole - TADA Convicts - Rajasthan Prisoners Release on Parole Rules, 1958 - The court held that the impugned orders rejecting the parole applications of the petitioners were unsustainable as they were passed in a mechanical manner and without due application of mind to the facts and law. The petitioners were granted second parole to maintain family and social ties.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners, TADA convicts serving life sentences, sought subsequent paroles after availing first paroles. Their subsequent parole applications were rejected by the Union of India. The petitioners approached the court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, challenging the rejection of their parole applications.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the rejection of the parole applications by the Union of India was unsustainable as it was done in a mechanical manner without due application of mind. The court granted the petitioners second parole to maintain family and social ties.
Issues: The main issue was the rejection of the petitioners' subsequent parole applications by the Union of India and the challenge to these rejections under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the rejection of the parole applications was unsustainable as it was done in a mechanical manner without due application of mind. The court also emphasized the importance of allowing convicts to maintain family and social ties through parole.
Final Decision: The court allowed the writ petitions, set aside the impugned orders, and granted the convict petitioners second parole for a period of 21 days to maintain family and social ties.
ORDER :
Sandeep Mehta, J.
1. These four writ petitions have been filed by the petitioners Fazlur Rahman Sufi @ Shamim, Asfaq, Habib Ahmad Khan, Abre Rehmat Ansari, all of whom have been convicted for various offences including that under the TADA Act and have been awarded life sentence and are incarcerated at the Central Jail, Jaipur.
2. It is not in dispute that each of the petitioners have been incarcerated in prison for a period in excess of 26 years. For the sake of ready reference it may be mentioned here that the petitioners have already availed first parole by virtue of the following orders:-
| Name of the convict petitioner | Order granting first parole |
| Fazlur Rahman Sufi@ Shamim | Order dated 22.02.2019 passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Criminal Appeal No.340/2019 for a period of 21 days |
| Asfaq | Order dated 14.05.2018 passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Criminal Appeal No.10468/2017 (MA No.1178/2018) for a period of 21 days |
| Habib Ahmad Khan | (1) Order dated 02.08.2018 passed by the Co-ordinate Bench of his Court in Parole Writ Petition No.700/2018 for a period of 20 days. The said parole was further extended for a period of four days by order dated 29.08.2018 (2) Order dated 15.01.2020 passed by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Parole Writ Petition No.654/2019 for a period of 15 days. |
| Abre Rehmat Ansari | Order dated 15.04.2019 passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Writ Petition (Criminal No.02/2018) for a period of 21 days |
3. After the petitioners had availed first/second paroles, as above, representatives/relatives of the petitioners submitted representations to the Government of India, Ministry of Home Affairs for grant of subsequent parole to the convict petitioners, which have been dismissed as below:-
| Name of the convict petitioner | Order rejecting parole application |
| Fazlur Rahman Sufi @ Shamim | 10.07.2020 |
| Asfaq | 22.06.2020 |
| Habib Ahmad Khan | 28.08.2020 |
| Abre Rehmat Ansari | 10.07.2020 |
4. For ready reference, the aforesaid orders are quoted hereinbelow:-
"F. No. 13011/05/2019-LC
Date 10.07.2020
ORDER
Whereas, this Ministry had received a representation dated nil from Mrs. Anisa Fazlur Rehman for 2nd parole to her TADA convict husband Fazlur Rehman Sufi @ Shamim facing lifetime imprisonment at Central Jail, Jaipur (Rajasthan).
2. And whereas, in order to consider parole to TADA convict Fazlur Rehman Sufi @ Shamim, this Ministry sought inputs from the authorities concerned.
3. And whereas, the matter was examined in detail in consultation with the Prosecuting Agency & State Government.
4. And whereas, as per Maharashtra Prisons (Bombay parole and furlough) Rules 1959, prisoners convicted under terrorist activities are not eligible for furlough and regular parole.
5. Now therefore, taking into consideration the recommendation of State Government, Prosecuting Agency and the serious nature of crime committed by Fazlur Rehman Sufi @ Shamim, the request of Mrs. Anisa Fazlur Rehman for 30 days parole to her TADA convict husband Fazlur Rehman Sufi @ Shamim does not find merit and is disposed of accordingly."
Asfaq
"F. No. 13011/02/2019-LC
Date 22.06.2020
ORDER
Whereas, a D.B. Criminal Writ Petition (Parole) No. 853/2019 was filed by TADA convict Asfaq before Hon'ble High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan at Jaipur Bench, Jaipur for 30 days parole.
2. And whereas, disposing off the aforesaid petition, the Hon'ble High Court of Rajasthan vide its order dated 03rd March, 2020 directed to consider the representation dated 29.08.2019 made by the petitioner Asfaq for 30 days parole.
3. And whereas, in order to examine the request of TADA convict Asfaq, this Ministry sought inputs from the authorities concerned.
4. And whereas, the matter was examined in detail in consultation with the Prosecuting Agency.
5. Now th
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
