1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR ORDER D.B. Civil Writ Petition No.850/2009 (Mohammed Riyaz Versus Inspector General of Prisons & Another) Date of Order :: 28th January, 2009 PRESENT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NARENDRA KUMAR JAIN HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GUMAN SINGH Mr. S.S. Hora for the petitioner Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. 2. The convict-petitioner has preferred this writ petition with a prayer that he may be transferred from Central Jail, Ajmer to Open Jail Camp Sanganer. 3. It is contended on behalf of the petitioner that earlier he was transferred from Central Jail to Open Jail, but subsequently without any reason he was sent back to Central Jail itself. Thereafter he went on hunger strike and his earlier order was revoked by the jail authorities, but again he has been sent back to Central Jail. 4. It is an admitted fact that for the same relief the petitioner preferred D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 2244/2008, which was dismissed by this Court vide order dated 21st 2 May, 2008, which is reproduced as under:- “The petitioner has prayed to send him from Central Jail, Ajmer to Open Jail Camp, Sanganer. We have heard the submissions advanced on behalf of the petitioner. It appears from the reply of the respondents that the petitioner made attempt to commit suicide and case under Section 309 IPC was registered against him. Looking to the conduct of the petitioner, we are not inclined to transfer him from Central Jail, Ajmer to Open Jail, Camp Sanganer. The petition stands accordingly dismissed.” 5. Subsequently petitioner preferred review petition which was also dismissed vide order dated 9th January, 2009, which is also reproduced as under: “Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. We are not convinced that it is case for review. The review petition is rejected. However, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that he may be granted liberty to file another petition. He is at liberty to do so with just exceptions of law.” 6. The submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that a liberty was granted to file a fresh writ petition while dismissing the review petition of the petitioner vide order dated 9th January, 2009, hence he has preferred this writ petition. 7. We have considered the submissions of learned counsel for the petitioner and also examined the aforesaid two orders passed by 3 this Court, whereby the writ petition as well as review petition for the same relief were dismissed on merits. It is correct that a liberty has been granted to the petitioner but facts remain as it is that a case under Section 309 IPC was registered against the petitioner during the period he was in custody in jail. Under these circumstances, we are not inclined to entertain this writ petition and the same is, accordingly, dismissed. (GUMAN SINGH), J. (NARENDRA KUMAR JAIN),J. DK