[2025:RJ-JP:3489] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Writ Petition No.2210/2024 Balveer @ Raj S/o Shri Shanker Singh, Aged About 40 Years, R/o Village Ladan Mohalla Pangyal, Police Station Ramnagar, District Udhampur (Jammu) (At Present In Central Jail Jaipur). ----Petitioner Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary Home, Secretariat, Jaipur. 2. Prisoners Open Air Camp Advisory Committee, Through Its Director, Jaipur. 3. Director General Of Prisons, Directorate Prisons Rajasthan, Ghatgate, Jaipur. 4. Superintendent Central Jail, Jaipur. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr.Vishram Prajapati For Respondent(s) : Mr.Manvendra Singh, PP JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND Order 23/01/2025 1. By way of filing of this criminal writ petition, a challenge has been led to the impugned order dated 14.10.2024 passed by the respondent by which the prayer of the petitioner for shifting him from Central Jail to Open Air Camp has been declined. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has suffered 14 years sentence and looking to his jail conduct, he was sent to Open Air Camp and thereafter, he was ordered to be re-shifted to Central Jail on the count that a staff member made a complaint with regard to quarrel by the petitioner. Counsel [2025:RJ-JP:3489] (2 of 3) [CRLW-2210/2024] submits that no enquiry or investigation was done in this regard and the petitioner was shifted back to Central Jail on 28.10.2023. 3. Counsel further submits that thereafter more than one year has passed and the jail conduct of the petitioner was found to be satisfactory, hence, under these circumstances, he again made a request for his shifting from Central Jail to Open Air Camp, but that has been declined for the reasons stated above. Counsel submits that one more opportunity be granted to the petitioner to reform himself. 4. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor opposed the arguments raised by counsel for the petitioner and submitted that the petitioner has misbehaved with the staff member during his stay in Open Air Camp that is why decision was taken for re-shifting the petitioner to Central Jail, that is the reason for not passing the order of his re-shifting to Open Air Camp again. Counsel submits that hence, under these circumstances, interference of this Court is not warranted. 5. Heard and considered the submissions made at Bar and perused the material available on record. 6. Considering the arguments put forward by the respective parties and looking to the fact that out of the total sentence, the petitioner has already served more than 14 years of sentence and his jail conduct was found to be satisfactory and only on account of one single incident dated 10.09.2023, he has been re-shifted to Open Air Camp, i.e., for the reasons of his quarrel with the staff member, in fact, no enquiry was conducted in this regard and the order of shifting of the petitioner was passed. [2025:RJ-JP:3489] (3 of 3) [CRLW-2210/2024] 7. Looking to the subsequent satisfactory conduct of the petitioner in jail, one last opportunity is granted to the petitioner for his reformation by shifting him from Central Jail to Open Air Camp. In case, the petitioner is found involved in repeating and committing the same incident again, he would be shifted back to the Central Jail. 8. In view of the above, the instant petition stands disposed of. The respondents are directed to pass appropriate orders by incorporating the above conditions in his order for shifting of the petitioner to the Open Air Camp. Consequently, the impugned order qua the petitioner stands quashed and set aside. The respondents are directed to shift the petitioner from Central Jail to Open Air Camp, strictly in accordance with law. 9. Stay application and all application(s), pending if any, also stand disposed of. (ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J Aayush Sharma /304