Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Anthony Rebello, a life convict serving sentence at Central Jail Colvale, Goa, filed a Criminal Writ Petition before the Bombay High Court at Goa challenging the rejection of his application for furlough for 28 days. He was convicted for offences under Sections 302, 392, and 201 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and had completed 17 years of imprisonment. The respondent no.1 (State of Goa) rejected his furlough application by an order dated 23/03/2017 based on a police report and Rule 313(2) of the Goa Prison Rules, 2006, which states that a convict under Section 392 IPC shall not be granted furlough. The petitioner argued that he had already been released on furlough in September 2016 and that his conduct was good. The respondent opposed the petition, contending that the petitioner, being a convict under Section 392 IPC, was not entitled to furlough under the Prison Rules. The court heard both sides and considered the nature of Rule 313(2). The court held that furlough is a right and not a privilege, and that Rule 313(2) is directory and not mandatory. The court noted that the petitioner had already been released on furlough earlier and that his long incarceration of 17 years and good conduct were relevant factors. The court allowed the petition, set aside the impugned order, and directed the respondent to release the petitioner on furlough for 28 days on usual terms and conditions. The court also directed that the petitioner be released within a week from the date of the order.
Headnote
A) Prisons Law - Furlough - Right vs Privilege - Rule 313(2) Goa Prison Rules, 2006 - The court considered whether a convict under Section 392 IPC is barred from furlough under Rule 313(2) of the Goa Prison Rules, 2006. The court held that furlough is a right and not a privilege, and that Rule 313(2) is directory and not mandatory. The court allowed the petition and directed the release of the petitioner on furlough for 28 days on usual terms and conditions. (Paras 4-6) B) Prisons Law - Furlough - Interpretation of Prison Rules - Rule 313(2) Goa Prison Rules, 2006 - The court interpreted Rule 313(2) which states that a convict under Section 392 IPC shall not be granted furlough. The court held that the word 'shall' in the rule is directory, and that the rule must be read in the context of the overall scheme of furlough which is aimed at reformation and rehabilitation. The court directed the release of the petitioner on furlough considering his long incarceration of 17 years and good conduct. (Paras 4-6)
Issue of Consideration
Whether a convict under Section 392 IPC is disentitled to furlough under Rule 313(2) of the Goa Prison Rules, 2006, and whether the said rule is mandatory or directory
Final Decision
The court allowed the petition, set aside the impugned order dated 23/03/2017, and directed the respondent to release the petitioner on furlough for 28 days on usual terms and conditions. The petitioner was to be released within a week from the date of the order.
Law Points
- Furlough is a right
- not a privilege
- Rule 313(2) Goa Prison Rules
- 2006 is directory
- not mandatory
- Section 392 IPC does not automatically disentitle a convict from furlough
- long incarceration and good conduct are relevant factors
