Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Rajesh Bhikaji Gade, a convicted prisoner lodged in Central Prison, Nashik, filed a Criminal Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging the order dated 9th May 2017 passed by the Deputy Inspector General of Prisons, Aurangabad Division, rejecting his application for parole. The petitioner sought parole for 30 days to arrange medical treatment for his wife, who was suffering from a kidney stone, and his daughter, who had an ear problem. The Deputy Inspector General rejected the application on the grounds that the petitioner was involved in criminal activities and his release might affect prison security. The High Court, after hearing the parties, observed that parole is a right of a prisoner to maintain family and social ties and cannot be denied solely on the ground of prison security or pendency of cases without specific evidence. The court noted that the medical treatment of family members is a valid ground for parole and that the authorities must consider such applications liberally. The court set aside the impugned order and directed the respondents to release the petitioner on parole for a period of 30 days on such terms and conditions as deemed fit, including furnishing a personal bond and surety. The court also directed the petitioner to surrender after the expiry of the parole period.
Headnote
A) Prisons - Parole - Medical Treatment of Family Members - Maharashtra Prisons (Bombay Furlough and Parole) Rules, 1959 - Rule 4 - The petitioner sought parole for treatment of his wife's kidney stone and daughter's ear problem. The Deputy Inspector General of Prisons rejected the application citing prison security and pendency of criminal cases. The High Court held that parole is intended to maintain family ties and cannot be denied solely on such grounds, especially when medical treatment of family members is involved. The court directed the respondents to release the petitioner on parole for 30 days on appropriate conditions. (Paras 1-10) B) Prisons - Parole - Right to Health - Maharashtra Prisons (Bombay Furlough and Parole) Rules, 1959 - The court emphasized that the right to health of a prisoner's family members is a valid consideration for granting parole. The denial of parole on the ground of prison security or pendency of cases without specific evidence of misuse is arbitrary. The court directed the authorities to consider parole applications liberally to serve the object of reformation. (Paras 5-9)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the petitioner, a convicted prisoner, is entitled to parole for the medical treatment of his wife and daughter, and whether the impugned order rejecting parole on grounds of prison security and pendency of cases is sustainable.
Final Decision
The impugned order dated 9th May 2017 is set aside. The respondents are directed to release the petitioner on parole for a period of 30 days on such terms and conditions as deemed fit, including furnishing a personal bond and surety. The petitioner shall surrender after the expiry of the parole period.
Law Points
- Parole is a right of a prisoner to maintain family and social ties
- not a privilege
- Right to health of family members is a valid ground for parole
- Parole cannot be denied solely on ground of prison security or pendency of criminal cases
- Parole Rules must be interpreted liberally to serve the object of reformation and rehabilitation.
