Back
SANDEEP MEHTA, FARJAND ALI
Sunder Lal – Appellant
Versus
State Of Rajasthan – Respondent
JUDGMENT
1. The convict petitioner has approached this Court through this writ petition for assailing the minutes/order dated 27.07.2022, issued by the District Parole Advisory Committee, Jaipur whereby, his application for regular parole of forty days has been rejected.
2. A perusal of the rejection order would reveal that the reasons assigned therein for denial of regular parole of forty days to the convict petitioner are totally perfunctory and the order suffering from total non-application of mind. The Committee observed that the parole application was being rejected because there was disagreement of the District Magistrate, Dungarpur and the Superintendent of Police, Dungarpur.
3. We have perused these two reports which have been annexed by the respondents with the reply. The letter dated 15.07.2022 issued by the Office of District Magistrate, Dungarpur, reveals that the same is based totally on the communication/report dated 07.07.2022 issued from the Office of the Superintendent of Police, Dungarpur and no independent application of mind was made by the District Magistrate, Dungarpur.
4. The report of the Superintendent of Police, Dungarpur dated 07.07.2022 indicates that it was
The rejection of a parole application should be based on proper consideration, reasoning, and the convict's conduct while on parole.
Parole is a concession for good behavior, not a right, and must be granted with consideration of rehabilitation, irrespective of family objections, unless supported by independent evaluation.
The court emphasized that the mere fact of serving a sentence for a heinous crime cannot be the sole reason to deny parole, and specific reasons must be provided to curtail or deny parole.
The court established that parole applications must be considered fairly and rationally, and not rejected mechanically without proper justification.
Parole rules are intended to facilitate the reintegration of convicts into society, and apprehensions of absconding can be addressed by requiring heavy bail and bonds.
The court established that the denial of parole must be based on justifiable grounds and that concerns regarding absconding can be mitigated through appropriate conditions.
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
