[2025:RJ-JP:8609] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Writ Petition No. 1729/2023 Mohammad Niyaamthullah @ Javed S/o Mohammad Barkathullah, Aged About 29 Years, R/o Kajipada, Dakshin Malikpur Bhereaipur, Dakshin 24 Paragana, Calcutta (West Bengal) Presently Resides At Bajariya, District Barabanki (Uttar Pradesh) (Presently Confined In Special Central Jail Shyalawaas, Dausa) Through His Mother Sarakhtoon W/o Shaukat Khan, Aged About 57 Years, R/o Bajariya, District Barabanki (Uttar Pradesh) ----Accused-Petitioner Versus 1. State of Rajasthan, Through Secretary, Department Of Home, Government of Rajasthan, Jaipur 2. District Magistrate, Dausa 3. Superintendent, Special Central Jail, Shyalawaas, Dausa. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Dheeraj Singhal, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. Naresh Gupta, Public Prosecutor HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR BHARWANI Order 25/02/2025 : Instant parole petition has been sent by the petitioner/ convict, namely Mohammad Niyaamthullah @ Javed s/o Mohammad Barkathullah, resident of Kajipada, Dakshin Malikpur Bhereaipur, Dakshin 24 Paragana, Calcutta (West Bengal) present address at Bajariya District Barabanki, Uttar Pradesh through his mother Smt. Sarakhtoon seeking directions to the respondents for granting him first regular parole for 20-days in accordance with Rules. Submission of learned counsel appearing for the petitioner is that since the Rule 14 (a) of the Rajasthan Prisoners Release on Parole Rules, 1958 has already been struck down by the Division Bench in the case of Om Prakash Vs. State of Rajasthan, reported in 2002 (1) Cr.L.R. (Raj.) 381, the order dt. 24.07.2023 dismissing the first parole [2025:RJ-JP:8609] (2 of 3) [CRLW-1729/2023] of the petitioner only on the ground that the petitioner is a resident of the other State, is not justified and, therefore, the petitioner is entitled to be released on parole. In support of his contentions, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, has placed reliance upon the following judgments i.e. (i) Kishan Bahadur Vs. State of Rajasthan & Others, 2014 CRI.L.J. 2600, (ii) Ajay Ghosh Vs. State of Rajastan & Others, - DB CWP No.826/2018 decided on 26.09.2018, (iii) Mahendra Kumar Vs. Director General Prisons & Others, 2005 SCC Online Raj.666, (iv) Kishan Vs. State of Rajasthan & Others, 1990 SCC Online Raj.171 and (v) Mohan Lal Vs. State of Rajasthan, 2002 SCC Online Raj.580. In the reply filed by the respondents, it is submitted that the prayer of the petitioner/convict for grant of first regular parole for 20- days has been considered by the District Leval Parole Committee, Dausa in its meeting held on 12.07.2023 but rejected in view of the fact that the petitioner/convict is a resident of Uttra Pradesh, which is outside the State and as per Rule 14 of the Rajasthan Prisoners Release on Parole Rules, 1958 the petitioner is not entitled for the parole. Heard learned counsel appearing for the parties. Perused the aforesaid judgments, more particularly the judgment rendered by the ld. Division Bench of this Court in the case of Om Prakash Vs. State of Rajasthan, reported in 2002 (1) Cr.L.R. (Raj.) 381, wherein this Court has struck down sub-rule (a) of Rule 14 of the Rajasthan Prisoners Release on Parole Rules, 1958 to the extent that the “persons whose ordinary place of residence is outside the State of Rajasthan”, meaning thereby, for the reason that the accused is resident of outside the State of Rajasthan cannot be denied the benefit of parole. [2025:RJ-JP:8609] (3 of 3) [CRLW-1729/2023] In view of above, the instant parole petition is hereby allowed. The order dt.24.07.2023 qua the present petitioner/convict is hereby quashed and the case is remitted to the District Level Parole Committee, Dausa for reconsideration with further direction that the case of the petitioner will be considered in the light of the judgment rendered by this Court in the case of Om Prakash (supra) within a period of one month from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. (VINOD KUMAR BHARWANI),J. ASHOK