SUNIL KUMAR S/O SHRI GHASIRAM v. STATE OF RAJASTHAN
CRLW/2094/2024 · 2026-01-27
Chandra Prakash Shrimali, Mahendar Kumar Goyal
Criminal Appealbody2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 19616 (RAJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 19616 (RAJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
[2026:RJ-JP:3522-DB] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR D.B. Criminal Writ Petition (Parole) No. 2094/2024 Sunil Kumar S/o Shri Ghasiram, Aged About 45 Years, R/o Plot No. 11246-47, Gali No. 3, Police Station Idgah New Delhi. (At Present Serving Sentence In Open Air Camp Sanganer, Jaipur). ----Petitioner Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through The Secretary, Department Of Home, Govt. Secretariat, Jaipur.
2. The Director General Of Prisons, Directorate Prison, Rajasthan, Jaipur.
3. The Superintendent, Central Jail, Jaipur. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Govind Prasad Rawat For Respondent(s) : Mr. Rajesh Choudhary, GA-cum-AAG with Mr. Shree Ram Dhakar, Dy. G. A.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MAHENDAR KUMAR GOYAL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SHRIMALI
Order 27/01/2026 This criminal writ petition has been filed for quashing the
order dated 14.02.2024 qua the petitioner passed by the respondents whereby, permanent parole has been denied to him. The relevant facts in brief are that the petitioner was convicted and sentenced by the learned Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track) No. 1, Jaipur, District-Jaipur vide judgment dated 31.07.2004 in sessions case No. 117/2003 under Section 302/120-B IPC to substantive sentence of life imprisonment and under Section 201 IPC was sentenced to seven years rigorous imprisonment. D.B. Criminal Appeal No. 939/2004 preferred by
[2026:RJ-JP:3522-DB] (2 of 3) [CRLW-2094/2024] the petitioner against the impugned judgment came to be dismissed by this Court vide judgment dated 16.04.2015 which has attained finality. As per his nominal roll submitted by the respondents alongwith their reply, the petitioner had served the sentence of 16 years 8 months and 1 day as on 01.12.2024 including remission. However, his candidature for permanent parole came to be rejected by the respondents on account that he absconded from 23.05.2011 to 06.08.2017 while on regular parole.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that a similarly situated prisoner namely Siraj Ahmad @ Mohd. Nasiruddin @ Mohd. Rijwan, who has overstayed parole for a period of 17 years, was extended benefit of permanent parole by the respondents vide order dated 19.11.2024 and case of the petitioner is not distinguishable from his case. He further submits that while, Siraj Ahmad @ Mohd. Nasiruddin @ Mohd. Rijwan was extended one parole after he returned after 17 years, he has been extended benefit of 2 regular paroles after 06.08.2017 without any complaint on any occasion. He, therefore, prays that the criminal writ petition be allowed, the order dated 05.06.2024 be quashed and set aside qua him and the respondents be directed to extend him benefit of permanent parole. Although, learned Government Advocate cum Additional Advocate General opposed the prayer; but, could not dispute that the prisoner namely Siraj Ahmad @ Mohd. Nasiruddin @ Mohd. Rijwan, who absconded for a period of 17 years while on regular parole, was extended benefit of permanent parole on account that
[2026:RJ-JP:3522-DB] (3 of 3) [CRLW-2094/2024] after he returned to jail, he has availed one regular parole without any complaint. In the aforesaid circumstances, we find that case of the petitioner is on better footing than the case of another prisoner namely Siraj Ahmad @ Mohd. Nasiruddin @ Mohd. Rijwan and we find no justification on the part of the respondents in rejecting his candidature for permanent parole. Accordingly, the criminal writ petition is allowed. The order dated 14.02.2024 qua the petitioner is set aside This Court directs the respondents to release the present petitioner on permanent parole if not warranted in any other criminal case, provided he furnishes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- with two sureties of Rs.50,000/- each to the satisfaction of the Superintendent Central Jail, Jaipur. The concerned Jail Authorities may further put any other condition to secure the presence of the present petitioner, if need be, in accordance with law. The present petitioner is further directed to maintain peace and tranquility during the period of permanent parole.
(CHANDRA PRAKASH SHRIMALI),J (MAHENDAR KUMAR GOYAL),J Tahir/49