Mumbai: Being unmarried and hence there are chances of absconding cannot be a reason not to grant furlough (temporary release of convict from prison) to a prisoner, the Nagpur bench of the Bombay High Court has said. The court has directed the prison authorities to consider the furlough application of Uttar Pradesh native Pralhad Feku Gupta, who has been sentenced to life in prison in a double murder case.
The court said the purpose of parole or furlough was to grant the convict an environment to connect with his family. The HC was hearing a petition filed by Gupta challenging the September 11, 2023 decision of the Special Inspector General of Prison, Nagpur, refusing furlough leave. He had sought 28-days furlough leave to spend time with his family.
Gupta’s advocate Sonali Khobragade submitted that the Superintendent of Police (SP) of Maharajganj, UP, had refused leave because the official had given a negative report. She pointed out that her mother is ready to stand as a surety. She urged the court to set aside the order of the Special IG, saying that Gupta has a right to look after his family.
State advocate Nandita Tripathi opposed the plea stating that Gupta has been awarded three life imprisonment sentences in a single case. Although the sentences will run concurrently, the gravity of the offence is required to be considered. Tripathi further contended that Gupta is unmarried and 26-year-old and that there was every possibility that he would go absconding if released on furlough.
The court noted that Gupta’s mother was ready to stand surety for him as she was in a position to control him. Furthermore, the bench said that the prison authority cannot consider the police report blindly.
“Only on the grounds that the petitioner is still unmarried and aged 26 and the possibility of him fleeing away cannot be ruled out are the reasons why the application has been rejected. We do not consider this to be a good ground even if the police authority gave an adverse report yet,” a bench of Justices Vibha Kankanwadi and Vrushali Joshi said.
The judges further said: “The long incarceration without allowing the inmate to meet his family is not good for society as well as for the individual inmate. He has to manage the responsibilities of his family by intermittently visiting the house.”
The court said “appropriate conditions can be imposed to rule out the possibility of a chance of fleeing away”, and hence the SPecial IG’s order deserves to be set aside. “The sanctioning authority must consider the overall situation and whether the possibility that is expressed can be said to be a true forthcoming possibility,” the judges underlined.
Bombay High Court Asserts Power To Decide Standard Rent In Landlord-Tenant Disputes
The court cancelled the rejection order and directed the authority to consider Gupta’s plea afresh and pass appropriate order within three weeks.
