Bombay High Court Allows Parole to Life Convict for Medical Treatment of Mother and Sister. Parole Granted Under Maharashtra Prison Rules Despite Adverse Police Report, Subject to Conditions.

High Court: Bombay High Court Bench: AURANGABAD In Favour of Accused
  • 1
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The petitioner, Milind @ Manoj @ Sharukh Khan Mahadu Thorat, a convict serving life imprisonment in Central Prison, Aurangabad, filed a Criminal Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking parole for 45 days. He claimed that his mother and sister were suffering from serious ailments and required his financial and moral support. The petitioner had been convicted for offences under the Indian Penal Code and the Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act, 1999. The respondents, the State of Maharashtra and the Superintendent of Central Prison, opposed the petition based on an adverse police report that highlighted the petitioner's criminal antecedents, including involvement in 12 criminal cases, and his past conduct during earlier releases on parole and furlough, where he had committed offences and failed to surrender on time. The Court, after hearing both sides, observed that parole is a reformative process and should be granted for compassionate grounds. The Court noted that the petitioner had already undergone a significant portion of his sentence and that his family's medical needs were genuine. The Court rejected the argument that the adverse police report alone could be a ground to deny parole, emphasizing that the purpose of parole is to enable the convict to maintain social and family ties. The Court allowed the petition and directed the petitioner's release on parole for 45 days, subject to stringent conditions: furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 25,000 with one surety, reporting to the police station every 15 days, not leaving the Aurangabad district, and surrendering on the expiry of the parole period. The Court also directed the police to ensure the petitioner's good conduct during the parole period.

Headnote

A) Prison Law - Parole - Compassionate Grounds - Maharashtra Prison (Bombay Furlough and Parole) Rules, 1959 - Rule 19 - The petitioner, a life convict, sought parole for 45 days to attend to his ailing mother and sister. The police report was adverse, citing his criminal antecedents and past misconduct during earlier releases. The Court held that parole is a reformative process and should be granted for compassionate reasons, especially when the convict undertakes to abide by conditions. The Court directed release on parole subject to stringent conditions, including reporting to police station and not leaving the district. (Paras 1-10)

B) Prison Law - Parole - Adverse Police Report - Maharashtra Prison (Bombay Furlough and Parole) Rules, 1959 - The Court held that an adverse police report alone cannot be a ground to deny parole if the convict is otherwise entitled. The purpose of parole is to enable the convict to maintain family ties and address genuine needs. The Court must balance societal interests with reformative goals. (Paras 5-9)

C) Prison Law - Parole - Conditions - The Court imposed conditions such as furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 25,000 with one surety, reporting to the police station every 15 days, not leaving the district, and surrendering on expiry of parole. The Court also directed the police to ensure the convict's good conduct. (Para 10)

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the petitioner, a convict serving life imprisonment, is entitled to be released on parole for 45 days to provide financial and moral support to his ailing mother and sister, despite an adverse police report citing his criminal antecedents and past conduct during earlier releases.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The Court allowed the petition and directed the petitioner's release on parole for 45 days from the date of his release, subject to conditions: (i) furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 25,000 with one surety; (ii) reporting to the police station every 15 days; (iii) not leaving the Aurangabad district; (iv) surrendering on expiry of parole; (v) the police to ensure good conduct.

Law Points

  • Parole is a reformative process
  • not a punishment
  • parole can be granted for compassionate grounds like medical treatment of family members
  • adverse police report cannot be the sole ground to reject parole
  • conditions can be imposed to ensure compliance.
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2017 LawText (BOM) (10) 45

Criminal Writ Petition No.1106 of 2017

2017-10-12

S.S. Shinde, Mangesh S. Patil

Mr. Rupesh A. Jaiswal for Petitioner, Ms. P.V. Diggikar, A.P.P. for Respondent Nos.1 & 2

Milind @ Manoj @ Sharukh Khan Mahadu Thorat

The State of Maharashtra and The Superintendent, Central Prison, Aurangabad

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Criminal Writ Petition seeking parole for 45 days on compassionate grounds for medical treatment of mother and sister.

Remedy Sought

Petitioner sought release on parole for 45 days to provide financial and moral support to his ailing mother and sister.

Filing Reason

Petitioner's mother and sister were suffering from serious ailments and required his support.

Issues

Whether the petitioner is entitled to parole for 45 days on compassionate grounds despite an adverse police report? Whether the adverse police report alone can be a ground to deny parole?

Submissions/Arguments

Petitioner argued that his mother and sister are suffering from serious ailments and need his financial and moral support. He undertook to abide by any conditions imposed by the Court. Respondents opposed the petition based on an adverse police report stating that the petitioner has criminal antecedents and his past conduct during earlier releases was unsatisfactory, including committing offences and not surrendering on time.

Ratio Decidendi

Parole is a reformative process and should be granted for compassionate grounds like medical treatment of family members. An adverse police report alone cannot be a ground to deny parole if the convict is otherwise entitled. Conditions can be imposed to ensure compliance and protect societal interests.

Judgment Excerpts

Parole is a reformative process and it is not a punishment. The adverse police report cannot be the sole ground to reject the parole. The petitioner is entitled to be released on parole for a period of 45 days.

Procedural History

The petitioner filed a Criminal Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India before the High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Bench at Aurangabad, seeking parole for 45 days. The petition was heard and finally disposed of on 12th October 2017.

Acts & Sections

  • Constitution of India: Article 226
  • Maharashtra Prison (Bombay Furlough and Parole) Rules, 1959: Rule 19
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Quashes Detention Order Under MPDA Act for Non-Communication of Right to Produce Witnesses Before Advisory Board — Violation of Article 22(5) of Constitution of India. Father of Detenu Challenges Detention Order on Ground That Det...
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Clarifies Armed Forces Disciplinary Powers in Adultery Case - Union of India's Application for Clarification Allowed. The Court held that the decriminalization of adultery under Section 497 IPC does not preclude disciplinary action agai...