1 D.B. Civil Writ Petition (Parole) No.15421/09 Makhan Lal @ Makhniya Vs. State of Raj. & ors. 10.02.2010 Hon'ble Mr. Narendra Kumar Jain,J. Hon'ble Mr. Raghuvendra S. Rathore,J. Mr. Lakhan Singh Tomar, for petitioner. Ms. Rekha Madnani, Dy. G.A. for the State. Heard the learned counsel for the parties. The petitioner has preferred this writ petition for grant of first parole of twenty days contending that he has already completed more than 1/4th of his total sentence and his conduct in jail custody was satisfactory. A notice to show cause was given to the respondent who has filed reply to the writ petition wherein it is contended that petitioner is habitual offender as 21 cases were registered against him, the details of which have been given in Annexure-R/1. It is further contended that petitioner earlier preferred D.B. Civil Writ Petition (Parole) No.2863/2009, which was dismissed on merits after perusing reply to the writ petition and this fact is not mentioned in the writ petition, therefore, the petitioner has concealed the material facts from this Court. 2 We have considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties. It is correct that petitioner has completed 1/4th of his total sentence, but it is a settled proposition of law that parole is not a matter of right. Looking to the conduct of the petitioner that he is a habitual offender and 21 cases were registered against him and his earlier writ petition was dismissed on merits, we are not inclined to allow this writ petition, and the same is accordingly, dismissed. (Raghuvendra S. Rathore),J (Narendra Kumar Jain),J. Mohit Item No.34