[2025:RJ-JP:7878-DB] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR D.B. Criminal Writ Petition No. 2019/2024 Mohammed Shamsuddin S/o Late Mohd. Rukunuddin, Aged About 55 Years, R/o No. 6-639, Rangeen Masjid, Mominpura, Gulbarga, Karnataka. (At Present Confined In Central Jail, Jaipur (Raj.), Through His Sister - Ms. Shahnaz Begum D/o Shri Rukunuddin, Aged About 64 Years, Resident Of No. 6-639, Rangeen Masjid (Amin Arts), Mominpura, Gulbarga, Karnataka. ----Petitioner Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary Home, Secretariat, Jaipur (Raj.). 2. The Union Of India, Through The Ministry Of Home Affairs, Govt. Of India, Is-Ii, Division/legal Cell, 2Nd Floor, Dhyan Chand National Stadium, Near India Gate, New Delhi. 3. Superintendent Central Jail, Jaipur (Raj.) ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Rajesh Kala For Respondent(s) : Mr. Vivek Sharma, Addl. G.A. with Mr. Gaurav Gupta, P.P. Mr. Anand Sharma, for respondent No. 2 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BHUWAN GOYAL Order 21/02/2025 1. The petitioner-convict has preferred this criminal writ petition (parole) challenging the order dated 27.05.2024 passed by the Ministry of Home Affairs, Govt. of India vide which application for releasing him on fourth regular parole of 40 days has been rejected. 2. Heard learned counsel for the parties. [2025:RJ-JP:7878-DB] (2 of 4) [CRLW-2019/2024] 3. It has been contended by counsel for the petitioner-convict that petitioner-convict was earlier released on regular parole either by the Hon'ble Supreme Court or by this Court and after availing the parole, he had surrendered himself before the concerned jail authorities within stipulated time and did not misuse the liberty of parole granted to him. Counsel for the petitioner-convict has also contended that application for 4th parole of the similarly situated co-accused viz. Abre Rehmat Ansari, Mohammad Afaq and Fazlur Rehman Sufi @ Shamim has been accepted by a coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 17.10.2024. The case of the petitioner-convict is akin to the case of co-accused, who have been released on 4th regular parole. Counsel for the petitioner-convict has also contended that jail conduct of the petitioner-convict has been found satisfactory and rejection of his parole application by the Parole Advisory Committee is, therefore, without application of mind. The petitioner- convict has already served sentences of more than 30 years. He has, therefore, prayed for release of the petitioner- convict on 4th regular parole of 40 days. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent - Union of India has opposed criminal writ petition. It has been contended that the petitioner is a TADA convict and is not entitled to release on parole under the Rajasthan Prisoners Release on Parole Rules, 2021 as well as Rules of the Central Government, 1955. 5. In counter to the above, counsel for the petitioner-convict has drawn attention of this Court towards order dated [2025:RJ-JP:7878-DB] (3 of 4) [CRLW-2019/2024] 27.05.2024 and submitted that petitioner-convict has been denied benefit of 4th regular parole on the ground that his release on parole will not only prejudice public order and peace of the society but would also be detrimental to the national interest but there is no foundation for such observations. 6. We have considered the contentions advanced by counsel for the parties and perused the material on record. 7. Considering the fact that applications for release on 4th regular parole of similarly situated co-accused have already been accepted; accused-petitioner has remained in custody for a period of more than thirty years and surrendered before concerned authority within time after availing earlier paroles; his jail conduct is satisfactory and no documentary evidence in support of adverse report has been placed on record to deny the prayer for grant of fourth regular parole of 40 days to the petitioner-convict thus, as per the Rajasthan Prisoners on Parole Rules, he is entitled for fourth regular parole of 40 days. Hence, in these facts and circumstances as well as material placed before us, we deem it proper to allow present writ petition (parole) and set aside the order dated 27.05.2024. 8. Consequently, present Criminal Writ Petition (Parole) is allowed. The order dated 27.04.2024 passed by the Ministry of Home Affairs, Govt. of India is quashed. The Jail Authorities are directed to release the petitioner on fourth regular parole for a period of 40 days on furnishing of his personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties of [2025:RJ-JP:7878-DB] (4 of 4) [CRLW-2019/2024] like amount each to the satisfaction of the Superintendent, Central Jail, Jaipur 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. 9. In case of his failure to surrender by stipulated date, the Jail Authorities shall proceed in accordance with law. 10. Office is directed to send a copy of this order to the Superintendent, Central Jail, Jaipur by fax today itself for necessary compliance. (BHUWAN GOYAL),J (NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA),J INDER/37