[2025:RJ-JP:24645-DB] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR D.B. Criminal Writ Petition No. 1936/2024 Sanjay Jain Alias Nawab S/o Shri Kailash Chand Pandya Jain, Aged About 59 Years, R/o B-70, Sethi Colony Police Station Transport Nagar, District Jaipur (Raj.). ----Petitioner Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary Home, Secretariat, Jaipur. 2. Advisory Board Constituted Under Rajasthan Prisoners (Shortening Of Sentence) Rules, Through Its Chairman, Divisional Commissioner, Jaipur Zone, Mini Secretariat, Jaipur (Raj.). 3. Director General Of Prisons, Directorate Prisons, Ghatgate, Jaipur (Raj.) 4. Superintendent Central Jail, Jaipur, Member Secretary Of Advisory Board Constituted Under Rajasthan Prisoners (Shortening Of Sentence) Rules. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Vaibhav Pancholy with Mr. Pawan Sharma For Respondent(s) : Mr. Rajesh Choudhary, GA-cum-AAG with Mr. Aman Kumar HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AVNEESH JHINGAN HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BHUWAN GOYAL Order 04/07/2025 AVNEESH JHINGAN, J:- 1. This petition is filed seeking quashing of order dated 14.08.2024 rejecting the prayer of the petitioner for pre-mature release. 2. The brief facts are that the petitioner was convicted for offences under Sections 302, 120-B IPC and Section 3/25 of Arms [2025:RJ-JP:24645-DB] (2 of 3) [CRLW-1936/2024] Act, 1959 vide judgment dated 16.03.2012. The petitioner was sentenced to life imprisonment and to pay fine of Rs.1,000/-, in case of failure to pay fine undergo six months of imprisonment. The appeal of the petitioner was dismissed by this Court. The petitioner was released on permanent parole vide order dated 12.06.2020. The application dated 12.01.2024 was filed by the petitioner for pre-mature release. The application was rejected by the impugned order stating that the report of the District Magistrate, Jaipur was not clear. The Superintendent of Police had not recommended pre-mature release of the petitioner. 3. During the pendency of this petition, additional affidavits were filed of Superintendent of Police and District Magistrate, Jaipur. As per the affidavits, the pre-mature release was being opposed on the ground that there is an apprehension of that there can be a dispute with regard to the property to be inherited by the petitioner and his siblings. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that similarly situated co-accused are already released on pre-mature release. 5. The apprehension raised that the dispute with regard to partition of property may arise, is contrary to the factual position as the petitioner is on permanent parole since 12.06.2020 and there is nothing on record that any untoward incident has happened in last five years. 6. In the circumstances mentioned above, the affidavits even if relied upon, do not serve the purpose of the respondent for denying the pre-mature release. The impugned order qua the petitioner is set aside. The petition is allowed. [2025:RJ-JP:24645-DB] (3 of 3) [CRLW-1936/2024] 7. The concerned authorities are directed to effectuate pre-mature release of the petitioner in accordance with law. (BHUWAN GOYAL),J (AVNEESH JHINGAN),J Sudeepak/42