[2025:RJ-JP:22696-DB] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR D.B. Criminal Writ Petition (Parole) No. 411/2025 Jagdish S/o Shri Keshari Lal, Aged About 23 Years, R/o Near Shiv Temple, Shiv Colony, Undaliya Ki Dungari, Police Station Sadar Bundi, District Bundi (Raj.) (At Present Confined In District Jail Tonk) Through His Son Mahaveer S/o Shri Jagdish, Aged About 32 Years, R/o Near Shiv Temple, Shiv Colony, Undaliya Ki Dungari, Police Station Sadar Bundi, District Bundi (Raj.) ----Petitioner Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Inspector General, Prison, Jaipur. 2. The District Parole Advisory Committee, Through The District Magistrate, Bundi (Raj.) 3. The Superintendent, District Jail Tonk (Raj.) ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Govind Prasad Rawat For Respondent(s) : Mr. Rajesh Choudhary, GA-cum-AAG with Mr. Aman Kumar, AAAG & Ms. Neha Goyal HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BHUWAN GOYAL Order 30/05/2025 1. Accused-petitioner has filed this Criminal Writ Petition (Parole) seeking first regular parole for a period of 20 days. 2. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that parole application of the petitioner has been rejected on the ground that the Superintendent, District Jail, Tonk as well as Superintendent of Police, Bundi have not recommended his case for grant of 20 days regular parole, whereas the petitioner has remained in custody for a period of more than six years and in District Jail, Tonk his jail [2025:RJ-JP:22696-DB] (2 of 3) [CRLW-411/2025] conduct was satisfactory. Therefore, there is no justification in rejecting the parole application of the petitioner. 3. Learned Government Advocate-cum-Additional Advocate General has opposed the writ petition. It is contended that Superintendent of Police, Bundi did not recommend the petitioner’s case for grant of first regular parole for 20 days on the ground that earlier the petitioner absconded from police custody and a case was also registered against him in this regard. 4. In counter to the above, counsel for the petitioner further submitted that the report of the Social Welfare Department is satisfactory. 5. We have considered the contentions advanced by counsel for the parties and perused the material came on record. 6. Considering the fact that the petitioner has remained in custody for a period of more than six years; thus as per the Rajasthan Prisoners Release on Parole Rules, 1958, he is entitled for parole; his jail conduct is satisfactory; Social Welfare report is also in favour of the petitioner, hence in these facts and circumstances as well as the material before us, we deem it proper to allow the present writ petition (parole) and set aside the order/recommendations dated 02.02.2024 qua the petitioner. 7. Criminal Writ Petition (Parole) is accordingly allowed. The order/recommendation of the Parole Advisory Committee dated 02.2.2024 qua the present petitioner is quashed. The Jail Authorities are directed to release the petitioner on first regular parole for a period of 20 days on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties of like amount to the satisfaction of [2025:RJ-JP:22696-DB] (3 of 3) [CRLW-411/2025] the Superintendent, District Jail, Tonk with the stipulation that he shall surrender himself before the Jail Authorities on the expiry of the parole period and shall maintain peace and tranquility during the parole period. The 20 days parole period shall be counted from the date of the petitioner’s release. 8. In case of his failure to surrender by stipulated date, the Jail Authorities shall proceed in accordance with law. 9. Office is directed to send a copy of this order to the Superintendent, District Jail, Tonk by fax today itself for necessary compliance. (BHUWAN GOYAL),J (NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA),J Sudeepak/47