CW 1881/08 //1// In the High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan Jaipur Bench ** Civil Writ Petition No.1881/2008 Shyoji & Ors Versus State & Others. Date of Order ::: 03/08/09 Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ajay Rastogi Mr. Sumer Singh, for petitioners Mrs Alk Bhatnagar Addl.Govt. Counsel, for respondents. At request, matter was finally heard at admission stage. Instant petition has been filed by five convict-prisoners with the grievance that their case has not been considered by respondents for transfer to Open Jail in terms of R.6 of Rajasthan Prisoners Open-Air Camp Rules, 1972, (“Rules, 1972”). It has been informed to this Court that petitioners-3 (Bhojraj) & No.5 (Nandji) both have been released after having completed their sentences. From material on record it appears that each of petitioners was convicted & sentenced to Ten years' RI with a fine of Rs.One lac (in default, further 2 years' RI), for offences U/s 8/18 & 8/21 of the NDPS Act by trial Court; in pursuance whereof, except petitioner No.2 (Smt. Sajna) other petitioner No.1 & 4 are undergoing their sentences in Central Jail, Jodhpur while she is serving out her sentence in Central Jail CW 1881/08 //2// (Mahila) Jaipur. Only submission made by Counsel for petitioners is that Prabhulal & his wife Smt. Kalyani) who were co-accused and convicted in same FIR registered against them were sent on transfer to Open-Air Camp in terms of R.6 of Rules, 1972 while no justification has been forwarded as to why different standards have been adopted qua present petitioners. This Court vide order dt.22/07/09 directed respondents to place on record minutes of advisory committee in regard to matter of transfer of petitioners and so also of other two co-accused (Prabhu & his wife Smt. Kalyani). However, this fact has not been disputed by Government Counsel that other two prisoners (named above) who were co-accused in self-same FIR registered against them alongwith present petitioners were sent on transfer to Open-Air Camp under the recommendations of advisory committee in terms of Rules, 1972. But no material has been placed on record by it can be inferred as to why a different standards qua present petitioners have been adopted. It is also not case of respondents that present petitioners falls within ineligibility condition for sending prisoners on transfer to Open Air Camp as provided U/r 3 of Rules, 1972. CW 1881/08 //3// If petitioners fulfills conditions of eligibility for transfer to Open-air Camp U/r 4 of Rules, 1972, ordinarily there should not be any justification to deny relief for sending them to Open-air camp, particularly when other similarly situated prisoners being co-accused alongwith petitioners in FIR registered against them for self-same incident were recommended by advisory committee for their transfer to open-air camp. In absence of justification having come forward on record, there appears to be substance in the submission made on behalf of petitioners for sending them on transfer to open-air Camp. Consequently, writ petition of Bhojraj petitioner-3 & No.5 (Nandji) who have since been released from jail upon having completed their sentences stands dismissed as having become infructuous. However, writ petition on behalf of other petitioners (Shyoji, Smt. Sajna & Nandji) is allowed. Respondents are directed to send afore named three petitioners to open-air camp in terms of R.6 of Rules, 1972 within one month from the receipt of this order. A copy of this order be sent to the concerned jail authority for compliance. No order as to costs. (Ajay Rastogi), J. K.Khatri/p.3/ 1881CW08Ag03PrisOpJail.doc