HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Criminal Writ Petition No. 529/2024 Padam Singh @ Pappi S/o Shri Ramsingh, Aged About 44 Years, R/o Nala Bazar Kaman, Police Station Kaman, District Deeg (Raj.) (At Present In Central Jail, Kota) Through His Father Ramsingh S/o Late Shri Bhuriya Lal, Aged About 77 Years, R/o Nala Bazar Kaman, Police Station Kaman, District Deeg (Raj.) 321022. ----Petitioner Versus 1. The 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, Kota. ----Respondents Connected With S.B. Criminal Writ Petition No. 523/2024 Dalchand @ Bablu S/o Shri Ramsingh, Aged About 40 Years, R/o Nala Bazar Kaman, Police Station Kaman, District Deeg (Raj.) (At Present In Central Jail, Kota) Through His Father Ramsingh S/o Late Shri Bhuriya Lal, Aged About 77 Years, R/o Nala Bazar Kaman, Police Station Kaman, District Deeg (Raj.) 321022. ----Petitioner Versus 1. The 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, Kota. ----Respondents (2 of 3) [CRLW-529/2024] For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Vishram Prajapati For Respondent(s) : Mr. Shyam Singh Yadav, Sp.PP Mr. Amit Punia, PP Ms. Muskan Verma and Mr. Anuj Rohilla JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND Order 18/11/2025 1. Both the instant criminal writ petitions have been preferred against the impugned order dated 24.01.2024, by which the applications submitted by the petitioners for their shifting from jail to Open Air Camp have been rejected. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that without assigning any justified reason, the applications have been rejected only on account of administrative reasons, but no specific reasons have been assigned, hence interference of this Court is warranted. Counsel further submits that appropriate orders be passed directing the authorities concerned to shift the petitioners to Open Air Camp. 3. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor opposed the prayer, but he is not in position to controvert the submissions. 4. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the view that the impugned order passed by the respondents has not assigned any reasons and the prayer of the petitioners has been rejected on the sole count of administrative reasons. (3 of 3) [CRLW-529/2024] 5. In the considered opinion of this Court, the respondents are supposed to pass a reasoned and speaking order while deciding the applications submitted by the petitioners. 6. With the aforesaid observations, both the instant criminal writ petitions stand disposed of. The matter is remitted back to the authorities concerned to pass a fresh, reasoned and speaking order within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. 7. All pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of. (ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J KuD/205-206