Permanent Parole Is a Reformative Measure: Rajasthan High Court Orders Release of Life Convict After 14 Years

The petitioner is serving a life sentence imposed on 19 April 2017 by the Special Judge, SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Cases, Kota (para 3). On 24 April 2026 the Home Department, relying on the State Level Parole Committee's recommendation, refused him permanent parole (para 2). His counsel said he had undergone 14 years and 16 days of actual custody, met the 1958 Rules' conditions, was not ineligible under Rule 14(c) and had satisfactory conduct in jail (para 3). The State replied that he had been found absent at a roll call in an Open Air Camp and shifted back to jail, that a number of cases were pending against him and that he was a habitual offender (para 4).

The Court recorded as an undisputed fact that the petitioner had undergone incarceration of more than 14 years (para 6). It accepted that 'a number of cases has been registered' against him, but stated that permanent parole under the 1958 Rules 'is a reformative measure intended to facilitate the social reintegration' of a convict who has demonstrated satisfactory conduct and undergone a substantial period of incarceration (para 6). Its object, the Court said, is 'not merely conditional release, but meaningful reintegration into society', while maintaining a balance between individual liberty and societal interest (para 6). Because he had spent more than 14 years in jail, the Court held that, under the eligibility conditions of the 1958 Rules, his case for permanent parole 'merits acceptance' and that he was entitled to be enlarged on permanent parole (para 6). It accepted the writ petition, set aside the order of 24 April 2026 and directed his release under Rule 9, subject to bonds and reasonable conditions imposed by the competent authority (para 7). The order does not separately address the State's report of his absence at the Open Air Camp roll call (paras 4, 6).