Back
DINESH MEHTA
Bhanwara Ram – Appellant
Versus
State – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Dinesh Mehta, J. - By way of the present petition, the petitioner has challenged order dated 27.07.2021, whereby petitioner's application for second parole of 30 days has been rejected by the District Parole Advisory Committee, Barmer.
2. The petitioner is serving the sentence for his conviction under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code and read with Sections 3/4 of POCSO Act, 2012.
3. The petitioner moved an application on 04.06.2021 and prayed that he be given second parole of 30 days in accordance with the Rajasthan Prisoners Release on Parole Rules, 1958 (hereinafter referred to as "the Rules of 1958").
4. In furtherance of the petitioner's application, the report of concerned Superintendent of Police, Barmer was sought, whereafter, petitioner's application was rejected by the Parole Advisory Committee in its meeting dated 27.07.2021 on the basis of report furnished by the Superintendent of Police, Barmer dated 30.06.2021.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner argued that the Parole Advisory Committee has rejected petitioner's application solely on the basis of the illegal report sent by the Superintendent of Police, Barmer.
6. Inviting Court's attention towards the copy of
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.
Release on Parole – Balance has to be struck between safety and emotional aspect of victim and statutory rights of accused.
The court emphasized balancing the statutory rights of the convict with the victim's safety, allowing parole under strict conditions to prevent contact.
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 upheld the DPAC's discretion in denying parole, emphasizing the need for valid concerns regarding law and order and the applicability of the old Parole Rules of 1958.
The rejection of a parole application should be based on proper consideration, reasoning, and the convict's conduct while on parole.
The policy of the State on the date of conviction would be the determinative factor in determining the entitlement of a convict for premature release.
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
