HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Writ Petition No. 1239/2025 Ramswaroop @ Radheshyam @ Kailash S/o Shri Bhuraram @ Ramkaran, Aged About 48 Years, R/o Village Tikkad, Police Station Hanuman Nagar, District Bhilwara (Raj.) (At Present In Special Central Jail Shyalawas Dausa) Through His Wife Kamla Devi W/o Shri Ramswaroop @ Kailash, Aged About 50 Years, R/o Village Bhangli Khurd, Bada Naya Gaon, Police Station Hindoli, District Bundi (Raj.) 323024 ----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 Special Central Jail, Shyalawas Dausa. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Vishram Prajapati For Respondent(s) : Mr. Amit Punia, PP JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND Order 12/11/2025 1. By way of filing this petition, a challenge has been led to the impugned order dated 08.04.2025, by which the application submitted by the petitioner for his shifting from jail to Open Air Camp has been rejected. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the reason for rejection of the application is that the petitioner has been convicted under Section 394 IPC, which is a prohibited section. Counsel submits that several persons have (2 of 2) [CRLW-1239/2025] been granted the benefit of their shifting to Open Air Camp, in-spite of their conviction for the offences, which are prohibited. 3. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor submits that after passing of the impugned order, a fresh application has been submitted by the petitioner for reconsideration of his case for shifting him to Open Air Camp from jail. The application has been forwarded by the competent authority to the Advisory Committee on 07.07.2025 and till date, no decision has been taken. Counsel submits that under these circumstances, appropriate directions be issued to the authority concerned to decide the petitioner’s application in accordance with law. 4. Considering the arguments put forward by the learned Public Prosecutor and looking to the fact that the successive application submitted by the petitioner with regard to the same prayer, which has been made before this Court by way of filing this petition, is pending before the Advisory Committee, this Court deems it just and proper to dispose of the instant petition with directions to the Advisory Committee to decide the pending application expeditiously, as early as possible, preferably within a period of two months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. 5. With the aforesaid observations/directions, the instant criminal writ petition stands disposed of. The stay application and all pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of. (ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J KuD/150