Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2021 Supreme(Raj) 1296

RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT BENCH AT JAIPUR
Sandeep Mehta, Prakash Gupta, JJ.
Fazlur Rehman Sufi @ Shamim & Ors. - Appellants
Versus
State of Rajasthan & Ors. - Respondents
Criminal Writ Petition No. 515/2020, Criminal Writ Petition No. 542/2020, Criminal Writ Petition No. 609/2020 and Criminal Writ Petition No. 848/2020
Decided On : 04-02-2021

Advocates appeared:
Mr. Mujahid Ahmad, Mr. Nishant Vyas, Mr. Lakhan Singh Tomar, for the Appellant; Mr. R.D. Rastogi, ASG, Mr. Akshay Bhardwaj, Ms. Alka Bhatnagar, P.P, for the Respondent.

The court established that maintaining family ties is a significant ground for granting parole, even for life convicts, and criticized the outdated nature of existing parole rules.

Headnote:
Parole - Writ Petitions - TADA Act - The court discussed the applicability of the Rajasthan Prisoners Release on Parole Rules, 1958 and the Parole Rules, 1955, emphasizing the importance of maintaining family ties and the need for updating parole rules.
Fact of the Case:

Four petitioners, convicted under the TADA Act and serving life sentences, sought second paroles after being incarcerated for over 26 years. Their applications were rejected by the Government of India, leading to writ petitions challenging these rejections.
Finding of the Court:

The court found that the rejection of the petitioners' parole applications was mechanical and lacked proper consideration of their conduct and the principles established in previous judgments regarding parole.
Issues: Whether the petitioners are entitled to second paroles despite their convictions under the TADA Act and the rejection of their applications by the Government of India.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the rejection of parole applications must consider the conduct of the convict and the need to maintain family ties, and that the existing rules were outdated and required revision.
Result: The writ petitions are allowed, and the petitioners are granted second parole for 21 days.

ORDER

Mehta, J. - 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. 10464/2017 (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 this 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

For ready reference, the aforesaid orders are quoted herein below:-

Fazlur Rahman Sufi & Shamim

"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 therefore, taking into consideration the serious nature of crime committed by him and recommendation of prosecuting authority that release of the c