Hon'ble Judges/Coram:
A.K. Sikri and Ashok Bhushan

JUDGMENT

A.K. Sikri, J.

1. Serial bomb blasts took place in five trains on December 06, 1993 at the behest of certain miscreants on the first anniversary of the Babri Masjid demolition. As per the allegations of the prosecution, a conspirational meeting was held in this behalf in Lucknow a couple of months before, to carry out the aforesaid operations. Six separate First Information Reports (FIRs) came to be registered where this bomb blast had taken place, namely, at Kota, Allahabad, Kanpur, Gujarat, Malkajgiri and Karjat. Five of these FIRs were clubbed together and the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) took up the investigation. During the course of investigation, the provisions of the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, 1987 (hereinafter referred to as TADA) were also invoked. The Appellant herein was one of the Accused persons and one of the allegations levelled against him was that he had supplied explosive material to Accused No. 1 for which he was paid money by the said Accused. Outcome of the trial by the CBI Court was that the Appellant, along with others, was convicted under TADA and awarded life imprisonment on February 28, 2004. This conviction has been upheld by this Court as well and, therefore, the conviction and sentence of the Appellant has attained finality. In this appeal, the issue pertains to grant of parole to the Appellant.

2. The Appellant had submitted an application for grant of regular parole for twenty days before the District Parole Advisory Committee (hereinafter referred to as the 'Advisory Committee') in the year 2014. His request was rejected by the said Committee on the ground that it did not have the jurisdiction to entertain parole for TADA prisoners. This action of the Advisory Committee was challenged by the Appellant in the form of writ petition Under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, which was filed in the High Court of Rajasthan. The High Court disposed of this writ petition vide order dated March 21, 2014 with the direction that his application be forwarded to the Advisory Committee to examine the same in accordance with law. In compliance ........