Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Gopal Hukka Bokshe, filed a Criminal Writ Petition before the Bombay High Court challenging the rejection of his application for parole. The parole was sought on the ground of illness of his wife. The application was rejected by the authorities on the ground that on an earlier occasion when the petitioner was released on parole, he did not return in time and overstayed for about ten years. He had absconded and had to be traced by the police and brought back to prison. The court considered the nature of parole, noting that grant of parole is discretionary and the rules relating to parole have been amended. Parole can be granted only in case of the contingencies mentioned in the Rules, like death or illness of a relative or in case of natural calamity like earthquake, floods, etc. It is only in such cases that parole can be granted and not for any other reasons like fixing marriage of a relative or attending marriage. The court relied on the Full Bench decision in S.Sant Singh @ Pilli Singh @ Ajit Singh Kalyani Vs. The Secretary, Govt. of Maharashtra & Ors., reported in 2006(2) Mh.L.J. 422. The court further observed that in cases of parole there is no decision which holds that the prisoner has a right to parole. Considering the petitioner's past conduct of absconding and overstaying parole for ten years, the court held that the petitioner is not entitled to any relief. The petition was dismissed.
Headnote
A) Parole - Discretionary Nature - Grant of parole is discretionary and can be granted only in contingencies mentioned in the Rules, such as death or illness of a relative or natural calamity like earthquake, floods, etc. - The court held that parole cannot be granted for other reasons like fixing marriage of a relative or attending marriage. (Paras 3-4) B) Parole - Previous Abscondence - Where the petitioner had earlier been released on parole and absconded for about ten years, the court held that such conduct disentitles him to the discretionary relief of parole. (Paras 2-4)
Issue of Consideration
Whether parole should be granted to a prisoner who had previously absconded and overstayed parole for ten years, and whether parole can be granted for reasons other than specified contingencies.
Final Decision
The petition is dismissed. The court held that the petitioner is not entitled to any relief considering his past conduct of absconding and overstaying parole for ten years, and that parole is discretionary and can be granted only for specified contingencies.
Law Points
- Parole is discretionary
- Parole rules amended
- Parole only for contingencies like death/illness of relative or natural calamity
- Not for other reasons like marriage
