##PAGE1##

[2026:RJ-JP:44089-DB]

REPORTABLE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR D.B. Civil Writ Petition (Parole) No. 12287/2026 CNR: RJHC020596482026 | URN: CW / 3923U / 2026 Anil S/o Shri Hetram, Aged About 44 Years, R/o Asthapan, Police Station Kumher, District Deeg (Raj.) (At Present In Central Jail, Sri Ganganagar), Through His Mother Mahadevi W/o Shri Hetram, Aged About 66 Years, R/o Village Asthapan, Police Station Kumher, District Deeg (Raj.) 321201.

----Petitioner Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary Home, Secretariat, Jaipur.

2. The Joint Secretary, Department Of Home (Group-12), Government Of Rajasthan, Government Secretariat, Jaipur.

3. The Prisoners Parole Advisory Committee (State Committee), Through Its Chairman, Director General Of Prisons, Rajasthan.

4. The Superintendent Central Jail, Sri Ganganagar.

5. The District Magistrate, Deeg (Raj.)

----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Vishram Prajapati For Respondent(s) : Mr. Aman Agrawal with Ms. Neha Goyal HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. SANJAY K. AGRAWAL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SAMEER JAIN

Order

29/10/2026

1. This writ petition has been filed against the impugned order dated 16.06.2026 passed by the Competent Authority, by which the application of the petitioner for release on permanent parole has been rejected on the ground that out of three regular parole, he has availed only one regular parole, therefore, he will not be entitled to permanent parole. The last paragraph of the impugned order states as under:

“राजस्थान कैदी कारावास कालीन अवकाश नियम 4958 ग्रावधानुसार जिन धाराओं में म॒त्युदण्ड प्रावधान नहीं है; उनमें 03 नियमित Rr weraryde भरुगती जाना आवश्यक है। किन्तु बंदी grt 07 नियमित पैरेल का उपभोग किया way है और इसके द्वारा किये गये उक्त कृत्य को दृष्टिगत रखते हुए समिति का मत है कि बंदी

को स्थाई पैयेल पर रिहा किया जाना सामाजिक fea में उचित नहीं होगा।”

2. Feeling aggrieved by the aforesaid order, the present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner stating that in the proviso second to Rule 10 of the Rajasthan Prisoners Release on Parole Rules, 2021 (for short ‘the Rules of 2021’), there is no such bar that if he has not applied any regular periodic parole or not availed any regular parole for any reason shall not be disqualified for permanent parole. As such, the impugned order passed by the Competent Authority is liable to be set aside.

3. Learned counsel for the respondents would support the impugned order.

4. We have heard learned counsel for the parties, considered their rival submissions and gone through the record of the case, including impugned order.

5. For grant of permanent parole, Rule 10 of the Rules of 2021 provides as under:

“10. Parole Period.- A prisoner, who has completed with remission, if any, one-fourth of his sentence and subject to good conduct in the Jail, may be released on first parole for twenty days including days of journey to home and back and for thirty days on second parole if his behaviour has been good during the first parole and for fourty days on third parole if his behaviour has been good during the second parole. If during the third parole also the prisoner has behaved well and his character has been exceedingly well and if the prisoner's conduct has been such that he is not likely to relapse into crime, his case may be recommended to the Government through the State Committee for permanent release on parole if he has served two third of sentence including remission on such conditions as deemed fit by the State Committee. The State Government may, on recommendation of the State Committee, grant parole on such conditions as deemed necessary by it among them the main condition being that if the prisoner while on parole commits any offence or abets, directly or indirectly, commission of any offence, he has to undergo the unexpired portion of the sentence in addition to any sentence imposed upon him for such an offence. In case the permanent release on parole is rejected, the prisoner shall be eligibl