Back
SANDEEP MEHTA, SAMEER JAIN
Gulveer S/o Shri Lal Chand – Appellant
Versus
State, Home Dept. , Jaipur – Respondent
ORDER
1. The petitioner Gulveer S/o Lalchand has filed the instant parole writ petition seeking to assail the recommendations dated 29.07.2021 drawn by the District Parole Advisory Committee, Hanumangarh in its meeting dated 15.07.2021, whereby his application for first parole of 20 days has been rejected.
2. The Committee turned down the prayer of the convict-petitioner for being released on parole on the ground that as per the police report, four convicts belonging to the same family including the present petitioner, have applied for grant of parole and thus, it would not be just and proper to release all these four co-convicts on parole simultaneously. The co-convict Lalchand (father of the petitioner) and Palaram (brother of the petitioner) have been granted first parole by the same order i.e. 29.07.2021. Vinod, being the other brother of the petitioner, has been granted parole by this court vide order dated 18.09.2021 passed in D.B. Criminal Writ Petition No.484/2021.
3. Having regard to the overall facts and circumstances as available on record, we are inclined to accept the instant parole petition, which is hereby allowed. The impugned recommendations dated 29.07.2021 drawn by
The court established that parole applications must be considered fairly and rationally, and not rejected mechanically without proper justification.
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.
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.
Denial of parole should be based on justifiable grounds, and apprehension of breach of law and order can be addressed by imposing appropriate conditions and requiring sureties.
The court emphasized that the reasoning for denying parole must consider the convict's family situation and the rehabilitative purpose of parole, as established in precedent.
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
