Back
2008 Supreme(Raj) 703
Rajasthan High Court, Jaipur Bench
Honble SHIV KUMAR SHARMA, J. Honble MAHESH BHAGWATI, J.
Ram Avtar Khatik & Ors. - Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan & Anr. - Respondents
D.B. Civil Writ Petition (Parole) No. 4370 of 2008
Decided On : May 29, 2008
Suresh Sahni, Rammohan, for Petitioners; B.P. Agarwal, Advocate General with R.P. Agarwal, for Respondents
Headnote:Rajasthan Prisoners Release on Parole Rules, 1958, Rule 12 – Parole period – Whether the sentence is actually continuing to run during emergent parole period? – Held – The sentence is actually continuing to run even during emergent parole period – Parole is a form of temporary release from custody which does not suspend the sentence or the period of detention, but provides conditional release from custody and changes the mode of under-going the sentence – Directed to include the period of emergent parole in the total period of sentence undergone.(Paras 4 to 7) Writ petition allowed.
jktLFkku isjksy ij cUnh fueqZfDr fu;e] 1958] fu;e 12 & isjkssy vof/k & D;k vkikr isjksy vof/k ds nkSjku ltk okLro esa pyuk tkjh jgrh gS\ & vfHkfu/kkZfjr & vkikr isjksy vof/k ds nkSjku Hkh ltk okLro esa pyuk tkjh jgrh gS & isjkssy rks vfHkj{kk ls vLFkk;h fuZeqfDr dk ,d Lo:i gS tks ltk ;k fujks/k dh vof/k dks fuyfEcr ugha djrh cfYd vfHkj{kk ls lkrZ fuZeqfDr dk micU/k djrh gS vkSj ltk Hkqxrkus ds <ax dks cny nsrh gS & vkikr isjkssy vof/k dks Hkqxrh xbZ ltk dh dqy vof/k esa lfEefyr djus ds funsZk fn;sA ¼in la[;k 4 ls 7½ ;kfpdk Lohdkj dhA
Whether the sentence is actually continuing to run during emergent parole period?
(2). In Rishipal vs. State of Raj. & Anr. D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 6462/2007 decided on 13.3.2008, it was held that during the parole period, there is no suspension of sentence but the sentence is actually continuing to run during that period also.
(3). The contention of learned Advocate-General Mr. B.P. Agarwal is that the case of the petitioners is governed under the provisions of Rule 12 of the Rajasthan Prisoners Release on Parole Rules, 1958 (for short the Parole Rules). Rule 12 of the Parole Rules provides as under:
"Parole period regarded as imprisonment served- The period for which a prisoner stays on parole under Rule 9, without violating the conditions laid down for the purpose, shall be treated as imprisonment served by him. All other kinds of parole shall be treated as sentence suspended."
(4). Undinably, in the Parole Rules, the term "all other kinds of parole" has not been defined. The Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court in Sunil Fulchand Shah vs. Union of India (2000) 3 SCC 409, considered the distinction between `bail and `parole and indicated thus:
"Bail and parole have different connotations in law. Bail is well understood in criminal jurisprudence and Chapter XXXIII of the Code of Criminal Procedure contains elaborate provisions relating to grant of bail. Bail is granted to a person who has been arrested in a non bailable offence or has been convicted of an offence after trial. The effect of granting bail is to release the accused from internment though the court would still retain constructive control over him through the sureties."
The Apex Court further held in Para 27 as under:
"...`parole is a form of temporary release from custody, which does not suspend the sentence or the period of detention, but provides conditional release from custody and changes the mode of undergoing the sentence."
(5). The word `parole has been defined in Rule 2(d) of Parole Rules as under:
"Parole means conditional enlargement of a prisoner from the Jail under these rules."
(6). This definition, in our opinion, covers the emergent parole granted under Rule 10-A also. The words `all other kinds of parole incorporated in Rule 12 are against the definition of `Parole provided in Rule 2(d). We, therefore, hold that the sentence is actually continuing to run even during emergent parole period.
(7). For these reasons, the writ petitions are allowed and the respondents are directed to include the period of emergent parole in the total period of sentence undergone by the petitioners.
