1 D.B. Civil Writ Petition(Parole) No. 14546/2010 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR ORDER D. B. Civil Writ Petition(Parole) No. 14546/2010 Arif Khan Vs. The State of Rajasthan & Others. Date of Order: 08.12.2010 Hon'ble Mr. Narendra Kumar Jain,J. Hon'ble Mr. Raghuvendra S. Rathore,J. Mr. Anshuman Saxena, for the petitioner. Ms. Rekha Madnani, Additional Government Advocate, for the State. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. Convict petitioner has preferred this parole writ petition for grant of first parole of 20 days under the provisions of Rajasthan Prisoners Release on Parole Rules, 1958 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules of 1958'). 3. Main submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that similarly situated person i.e. co-accused was granted benefit of first parole, therefore, petitioner may also be granted first parole of 20 days. 2 D.B. Civil Writ Petition(Parole) No. 14546/2010 4. A notice to show cause was issued to respondents and in response thereto, respondents have filed reply alongwith report of Superintendent of Police, Kota City, wherein it is mentioned that reason disclosed in the application by the petitioner for grant of parole is that he wants proper treatment of his mother from good doctor, whereas his mother was found to be healthy and not suffering from any disease and no medical certificates have been produced by the petitioner in this regard. 5. District Parole Advisory Committee after considering all the facts and circumstances of the case, including report of Superintendent of Police, Kota City, rejected application of the petitioner in its meeting dated 27.08.2010 (Annexure-1). 6. As per Rule 13 of the Rules of 1958, parole cannot be claimed by a convict as a matter of right. Apart from above, it is also relevant to mention that allegation against the petitioner was that he abducted a boy and committed his murder. Petitioner was convicted under Sections 364-A and 302 I.P.C. 3 D.B. Civil Writ Petition(Parole) No. 14546/2010 7. This Court has already observed number of times that gravity of an offence is always a relevant consideration to be considered at the time of considering application for grant of parole moved by the convict. 8. After considering all the facts and circumstances of the case and submissions of learned counsel for the petitioner, we do not find any illegality in the order passed by District Parole Advisory Committee in rejecting the application of the petitioner. 9. There is no merit in this writ petition and the same is, accordingly, dismissed. (Raghuvendra S. Rathore),J. (Narendra Kumar Jain),J. Manoj, Item No.20.