[2026:RJ-JD:7402]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Criminal Writ Petition No. 2249/2024 Mahaveer S/o Shri Birbal Ram, Aged About 52 Years, At Present Lodged In Central Jail, Bikaner Through His Wife Panku Devi W/o Shri Mahaveer, Aged About 46 Years, R/o Naharsar, P.s.

Sadarsahar, District Churu.

----Petitioner Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan, Home Department, Jaipur.

2. The Director General (Jail), Jaipur.

3. The District Collector, Churu

4. The Superintendent, Central Jail Bikaner.

----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Kaluram Bhati For Respondent(s) : Mr. Deepak Choudhary, AAG Mr. Surendra Bishnoi, AGA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FARJAND ALI

Order

02/02/2026

1. The present criminal writ petition has been preferred on behalf of the convict-petitioner assailing the adverse recommendations dated 14.02.2024 drawn by the State Level Prison Open Air Camp Advisory Committee, Jaipur, whereby the petitioner’s application for being sent to Open Air Camp was rejected.

2. The record reveals that the petitioner stands convicted for the offence under Section 376 IPC and was sentenced to undergo ten years’ rigorous imprisonment vide judgment dated 29.09.1995 passed by the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Churu in Sessions Case No. 89/1993. The appeal preferred by the petitioner against the said conviction came to be dismissed and the judgment of conviction attained finality.

3. As per the custody certificate placed on record and not disputed by the respondents, the petitioner has undergone more than one-third of the substantive sentence including remission and his jail conduct has been reported to be satisfactory. It is also not in dispute that the petitioner was earlier released on first parole pursuant to the order passed by this Court in S.B. Criminal Writ Petition No. 380/2024 and during the said parole period, his conduct remained satisfactory.

4. The petitioner applied for transfer to Open Air Camp under the Rajasthan Prisoners Open Air Camp Rules, 1972. The said application was, however, rejected by the State Level Prison Open Air Camp Advisory Committee primarily on the ground that the petitioner stands convicted for an offence under Section 376 IPC and thus falls within the category of ineligibility under Rule 3 of the Rules of 1972.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the rejection is mechanical, suffers from non-application of mind and is contrary to the settled legal position that Rule 3 of the Rules of 1972 is not mandatory but directory in nature. It was submitted that the expression “ordinarily” occurring in Rule 3 clearly obligates the Committee to examine the individual facts and mitigating circumstances of each case. Reliance has been placed upon the decision of this Court in Ajit Singh vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. (D.B. Criminal Writ Petition No. 52/2022 decided on 11.03.2022), as also upon other judgments rendered by Coordinate Benches of this Court, wherein adverse recommendations denying transfer to Open Air Camp solely on the ground of conviction under Section 376 IPC were set aside and the competent authorities were directed to reconsider or grant the benefit of transfer in accordance with the Rajasthan Prisoners Open Air Camp Rules, 1972.

6. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the State supported the impugned recommendations and submitted that the petitioner has been convicted for a serious offence and therefore the Committee has rightly rejected his application.

7. This Court has given its thoughtful consideration to the rival submissions and perused the material available on record.

8. Before adverting to the facts of the present case, it would be apposite to refer to the relevant statutory provisions. Rule 3 of the Rajasthan Prisoners Open Air Camp Rules, 1972 reads as under:

“3. Prisoners who shall ordinarily not be eligible for admission to Open Air Camps.— The following prisoners shall ordinarily not be eligible for admission to Open Air Camps:—

…” (emphasis supplied)

A conjoi