D.B. CIVIL WRIT (PAROLE) PETITION NO.4926/2010 [BHANWAR LAL @ BHANWARA RAM VS. STATE OF RAJ.] Date of Order :: 18.08.2010 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAKASH TATIA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KAILASH CHANDRA JOSHI Mr.K.R.Bhati for the petitioner. Mr. K.R. Bishnoi – Public Prosecutor ***** Heard learned counsel for the petitioner Bhanwara Lal @ Bhanwara Ram S/o Chetan Ram whose prayer for release on first parole was rejected by the Parole committee in its Meeting dated 07.04.2010 on the ground that he has committed murder of his father and grand father and is having bad habits also. In Parole Committee Report it is mentioned that on earlier occasion also petitioner was released on parole and then his conduct was not found good. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that though there was allegation against the petitioner for committing murder of father and grand father [in relation] but he was acquitted by the trial court vide judgment dated by the trial court vide judgment dated 11.06.1992 in Sessions Case No.41/1991 by the Court of Addl. Sessions Judge Nagaur camp Deedwana. So far as the allegation of murder of his grand father is concerned, it is also submitted that this is petitioner's first parole petition and, therefore, there was no occasion for recording that petitioner's conduct during first parole was not good. We also found that in earlier Parole Petition No. 9581/2009 wherein in Parole Committee's Meeting dated 23.07.2009 petitioner's prayer for parole was rejected. The petitioner's said Parole Petition No.9581/2009 was dismissed by the Court vide order dated 05.12.2009 on the ground that since appeal against conviction is pending for final hearing before the Court, therefore, the parole petition is not maintainable. However, Division Bench of this Court in D.B. Criminal Appeal no.343/2002 decided on 22.02.2010 in the matter of Gani Khan vs. State of Raj. while deciding the petition whether parole can be granted to the convict even when appeal is pending against conviction or during the trial court held that benefit of parole is not available to under trial but available to convict. In view of the above, this present parole petition is maintainable. The reasons given by the Parole Committee in its Meeting dated 07.04.2010 proceeded on facts that petitioner has committed murder of his father and grand father [in relation] and is serving sentence for both the offences and petitioner has misused the first parole. The facts are found to be not erred. We do not find any reason to deny the prayer of petitioner for his first parole and we deem it just and proper to release petitioner on first parole for a period of twenty days. Accordingly, this parole petition is allowed. However, respondents are directed to release petitioner on first parole for a period of twenty days from the date of his actual release, on appropriate terms and conditions as per law. [KAILASH CHANDRA JOSHI],J. [PRAKASH TATIA],J. mamta