Overstaying parole not a ground for rejection of application for permanent parole
Aspect | Summary | Ratio Decidendi |
Case Name | Om Prakash v. State of Rajasthan | |
Petitioner | Om Prakash | |
Sentence | Life Imprisonment | |
Petition | Challenged rejection of permanent parole application under Article 226 | |
Grounds for Parole | Good conduct, serving over 15 years | |
Initial Rejection Reason | Overstaying previous temporary parole | |
Relevant Rule | Rule 14(c) of Rajasthan Prisoners (Release on Parole) Rules, 1958 | Overstaying parole not a ground for rejection under this rule (meant for escape attempts) |
Court’s Criticism | Improper consideration of application and reliance on irrelevant case law | |
Court’s Decision | Quashed rejection order, directed release on permanent parole with conditions |
Summary
Mr. Om Prakash who was sentenced to life imprisonment, petitioned in the Rajasthan High Court under Article 226 of Constitution of India in order to challenge the rejection of his application for permanent parole. He argued his eligibility based on his good conduct in the prison and serving over 15 years in the jail. The initial rejection cited his overstaying a previous temporary parole period.
Ratio Decidendi
The Rajasthan High Court ruled that overstaying temporary parole is not a ground to reject a plea for permanent parole under Rule 14(c) of the Rajasthan Prisoners (Release on Parole) Rules, 1958. This rule applies only to escape attempts, not exceeding parole duration. The court also found fault with the authority’s failure to properly consider the application and reliance on irrelevant case law.
Therefore, the court quashed the rejection order and directed the petitioner’s release on permanent parole with specific conditions.
Here are the key points from the court’s decision:
- Overstaying in Parole and grant of Permanent Parole:
- The petitioner had previously been released on parole but overstayed after the parole period.
- The competent authority initially rejected the petitioner’s application for permanent parole due to this overstaying.
- However, the court clarified that overstaying parole should not automatically disqualify a prisoner from being considered for permanent parole.
- Rule 14 of the Rajasthan Prisoners (Release on Parole) Rules, 1958:
- Rule 14 of the Rules states that prisoners who have escaped from jail or police custody or have attempted to escape from custody are not entitled to be released on parole.
- The court emphasized that the petitioner’s case did not fall under this rule because his overstaying did not involve escape or attempted escape.
- Eligibility for Permanent Parole:
- The petitioner argued for his eligibility for permanent parole was based on his satisfactory conduct during his imprisonment i.e confinement in the prison.
- He had served over 15 years of his sentence, and his behavior in jail was commendable.
- Lack of Proper Consideration by Competent Authority:
- The court found fault with the competent authority’s rejection of the petitioner’s application.
- The authority had failed to apply its mind properly and had also relied on an unrelated judgment.
- Court’s Decision:
- The court quashed the rejection order and directed the release of the petitioner on permanent parole.
- Certain conditions, including furnishing a personal bond and maintaining peace during the parole period, were imposed.
In summary, the court clarified that overstaying parole alone should not be a ground for rejecting permanent parole. The focus should be on the prisoner’s conduct and eligibility. The decision ensures a fair and just approach in parole matters, considering individual circumstances1.
Please feel free to contact our firm Khanna and Assocaites ranking No 1 as the best law firm in Jaipur for High Court Matters.
For any query pertaining to criminal legal service in Jaipur including Pre FIR Consultation, FIR and Investigation, Bail and Anticipatory Bail, Quashing of FIR
