Convicts in Maharashtra entitled to 14-day emergency parole, says Bombay HC

The bench said the prison authority cannot insist that while on parole, the convict can spend time with his family only during the day and has to spend the night at a nearby jail.

In a reprieve for thousands of convicts lodged in prisons across Maharashtra, the Bombay high court (HC) held that all convicts, except foreign nationals and prisoners on death row, are entitled to 14 days emergency parole, even if they are not eligible for furlough and regular parole.

The Bombay high court (HC) held that all convicts, except foreign nationals and prisoners on death row, are entitled to 14 days emergency parole. (HT Photo)

The division bench of justice Abhay Oka and justice AS Gadkari said all prisoners eligible for furlough are also eligible for regular parole and thus, if a prisoner is disentitled to furlough by virtue of the disqualifications laid down in the Prisons (Bombay Furlough and Parole) Rules, 1959, he is also disentitled to regular parole.

“Even if a prisoner attracts disqualification for grant of furlough, emergency parole cannot be denied to him,” the bench said. It was hearing separate petitions filed by Dilip Pawar and Muzammil Shaikh, complaining about the grant of very short parole after the death of their respective fathers in January 2019.

Under Rule 19(1), emergency parole for 14 days can be granted on account of death of a parent, grandparent, spouse, child or sibling. It can also be granted on account of marriage of a sibling or a child. The jail authorities have the discretion to grant the parole either with or without a police escort — at the expense of the prisoner.

The bench said the prison authority cannot insist that while on parole, the convict can spend time with his family only during the day and has to spend the night at a nearby jail.

“Such a course is not permissible, as the object of providing for grant of emergency parole is that the convicted prisoner can remain [in the] company of his family members in case of death of close relatives, and can attend the obsequies,” said the bench, while commenting on the condition.

The court was annoyed to note that Pawar, lodged at Nasik Road Central Prison, was granted only two days parole despite being required to travel 550km to reach his native place from the jail. He could not even complete the journey during the parole leave.

The bench has, therefore, directed jail authorities to record brief reasons if they wish to grant parole of fewer than 14 days. Jail authorities will also have to record brief reasons for granting parole under police escort, as the prisoner is required to pay the police escort charges.

The bench was irked to note that there were no guidelines for levying these charges and arbitrary amounts were being recovered from the prisoners. It has now directed the government to frame appropriate guidelines for the same, within a month.