HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN (JODHPUR BENCH)
DR. JUSTICE PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI, MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SHRIMALI, JJ
SOHAN SINGH – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF RAJASTHAN – Respondent
CRLW / 117 / 2025
Order :
1. This parole petition has been filed on behalf of the petitioner aggrieved with the condition imposed by the District Parole Advisory Committee, Hanumangarh vide order dated 26.11.2024 for furnishing two sureties of Rs.1,00,000/- each with a personal bond of Rs.1,00,000/- for the purpose of availing second 30 days’ parole.
2. The petitioner was convicted for the offence under Section 302 of IPC and sentenced for life imprisonment by the learned Sessions Judge, Hanumangarh vide judgment dated 23.04.2008. He has already undergone the sentence of 11 years, 6 months and 2 days. The petitioner was granted first parole for 20 days, which was successfully completed by him, and now, he has again granted the benefit of second parole by the District Parole Advisory Committee, Hanumangarh vide order dated 26.11.2024 for the period of 30 days.
3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner contended that the petitioner belongs to lower echelon of the society and thus he is not in a position to furnish two sureties of Rs.1,00,000/- each as ordered and on account of such inability, the petitioner is being deprived of the parole and, therefore, he may be granted 30 days’ parole on furnishing a personal bond in sum of Rs.1,00,000/-.
4. Though the prayer is opposed by the learned AAG; however, in the factual report, it is indicated that the family members of the petitioner are daily wages labour; they hold a BPL Card and their economic status is not good.
5. Looking to the fact that the petitioner was granted benefit of first parole of 20 days, which was successfully completed by him, and the second parole of 30 days’ has also been granted by the District Parole Advisory Committee, Hanumangarh vide order dated 26.11.2024 as well as the status report submitted by the learned AAG along with the reply, reflects poor economic status of the family of the petitioner. This Court deems it appropriate to relax the condition of furnishing two sureties of Rs.1,00,000/- each as imposed vide order dated 26.11.2024.
6. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and after going through the record, this parole petition is allowed and the Superintendent, District Jail, Hanumangarh is directed to release the petitioner - Sohan Singh S/o Bacchan Singh on 30 day’ parole on furnishing a personal bond of Rs.1,00,000/- only. The condition of furnishing two sureties of Rs.1,00,000/- each is hereby relaxed.
7. All the other conditions imposed vide order dated 26.11.2024 shall remain the same
The court must consider the economic status of a prisoner when imposing conditions for parole, allowing for relaxation in cases of genuine hardship.
Conditions for parole may be relaxed when the petitioner demonstrates good conduct and special circumstances warrant such a decision.
The court established that financial hardship can justify the relaxation of conditions imposed for parole, ensuring that legal provisions are applied equitably.
The court has the discretion to relax conditions for parole, taking into account the financial condition of the convict and his family.
The court has the discretion to waive surety conditions for parole based on the petitioner's financial circumstances and previous rulings.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.