Back
SANDEEP MEHTA, RAMESHWAR VYAS
Girdhari Singh – Appellant
Versus
State Of Rajasthan – Respondent
ORDER
1. The petition at hand presents a very sorry state of affairs. The convict-petitioner's mother expired on 09.03.2022. An application for interim parole was filed on behalf of the petitioner to the Superintendent, Central Jail, Bikaner on 10.03.2022. But it was not decided for the purported reason that the prayer in the application was for grant of 15 days' emergent parole. The Superintendent, Central Jail, Bikaner reportedly forwarded the application to the District Collector, Bikaner, who remitted it back to the Superintendent, Central Jail, Bikaner for passing appropriate order. Nearly a month had passed since the petitioner's mother expired, where after he moved the instant writ petition.
2. While issuing notices on 08.04.2022, an oral direction was given to the learned GA-cum-AAG that the emergent parole (application of the petitioner should be decided, where after, he has been released on emergent parole.
3. This Court has time and again directed the jail as well as parole authorities to remain vigilant while deciding the emergent parole applications and to ensure that orders are passed thereupon within 7 days of presentation. Now under Rule 23 of the Rajasthan Prisoners R
The court emphasized the importance of timely decision-making on emergent parole applications and held the authorities accountable for non-compliance with the rules and court directions.
Officials must comply with the Parole Rules, 2021 and ensure timely decision on emergent parole applications, especially in cases of humanitarian grounds.
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
