Back
VIVEK SINGH THAKUR, RAKESH KAINTHLA
Rajesh Kumar @ Surya – Appellant
Versus
State of H. P. – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Vivek Singh Thakur, J.
Petitioner, by invoking the provisions of Article 226 of the Constitution of India, has approached this Court seeking direction to the respondents to release the petitioner on parole for 28 days and to direct the respondent to decide the parole application of the petitioner, which at the time of filing the petition, was pending for last more than 5 months.
2. Respondents have placed on record instructions dated 22.4.2024 alongwith documents including communication dated 18.4.2024, sent from Director General Prisons & Correctional Services, Himachal Pradesh to the Superintendent Jail, whereby rejection of the application of the petitioner in view of non recommendation of District Authorities, has been communicated during pendency of petition.
3. Petitioner is serving sentence imposed upon him in sequel to conviction by learned Special Judge, POCSO, Shimla vide judgment dated 17.3.2022 in Sessions Trial No. 61-S/7 of 2018/21, case FIR No. 90 of 2018, registered under Sections 363, 366 and 376 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 4 of POCSO Act, in Police Station Chopal, District Shimla, H.P., whereby he has been convicted for 10 years rigorous imprisonme
The court emphasized the need for substantiated grounds to reject a parole application and considered the petitioner's entitlement to parole benefits based on previous compliance and lack of material....
The central legal point established is that the rejection of a parole application must be based on valid and substantiated reasons, in accordance with the relevant provisions and case law.
Rejection of parole based solely on pending FIR and victim's objection held arbitrary; mere FIR registration not ground to deny; grant parole with conditions to uphold reformation and family ties eve....
The legal principle established is that parole should not be denied based on mere assumptions and there should be sufficient material to support the rejection.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the rejection of parole should be based on solid reasons and material, and not on surmises and conjectures. The court emphasized the right to ....
Denial of parole must be based on substantial evidence related to security and public order; mere speculative fears are insufficient to withhold a convict's eligibility.
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
