Mumbai: The Bombay High Court has observed that issues like family members' serious illness, wife's delivery, natural calamities etc are unforeseen and thus a prisoner cannot be asked to wait for one and a half years, till he becomes eligible to avail the facilities of furlough or parole leaves.
The court has directed the Superintended of Nashik Central Jail to reconsider parole application by one Balaji Puyad who sought leave following his wife’s illness, but was denied.
“Though, the cause like death, is now categorised into emergency parole, still the contingency like serious illness of father/mother/spouse/son/daughter; delivery of wife; natural calamities such as house collapse, flood, fire, earthquake definitely is an unforeseen contingency and one cannot speculate as to when such contingency will occur and, definitely, in such a case, the prisoner shall not be asked to wait for one and half year of actual imprisonment, to be undergone by him, when he seek parole leave on any of these contingencies, set out for availing regular parole,” a bench of Justices Bharati Dangre and Manjusha Deshpande said on October 25.
Puyad was released on regular furlough on April this year. However, he again sought parole on September 6 citing his wife’s ill health.
The jail authorities denied the same by an order Dated September 30, relying on February 10, 2022 circular which barred prisoners from seeking parole or furlough leaves prior to completing one and a half years of their last return or the start of the actual imprisonment.
The HC noted that SP’a decision denying parole to Puyad, on the ground that he applied for the same only within 5 months and 11 days of his returning from an earlier availed furlough, was unsustainable.
The judges said that the February 2022 circular needs to be stuck down, however, it not quash it saying that the petition did not challenge the validity of the said circular. The bench then asked the SP to decide on the Puyad’s application on merit.
