Search Results for "parole eligibility"

Trending :

Bombay High Court Dismisses NHAI Appeals in Land Acquisition Compensation Disput...
Bombay High Court Dismisses Developer's Challenge to Deemed Conveyance in Favor ...
Bombay High Court Allows Appeal in Arbitration Act Case — Upholds Appointment ...
Bombay High Court Upholds Conviction of Appellant for Murder Under Section 302 I...
High Court of Bombay Quashes Deputy Registrar's Directives in Co-operative Socie...

Search Results for "parole eligibility"

21 result(s) found

Home Search Results

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 21 result(s)

High Court

Bombay High Court Dismisses Writ Petition Challenging Parole Eligibility Rule in Negotiable Instruments Act Case. Rule 14 of Maharashtra Prisons (Furlough and Parole) Rules, 2024 requiring one year actual imprisonment for parole eligibility held valid; petitioner convicted under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 not entitled to parole before completing one year.

4 May 2026

The petitioner, Vinodkumar Chellappan Pillai, filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India before the Bombay High Court, Circu...

High Court

Madras High Court Upholds Denial of Ordinary Leave to Convicts in Multiple Cases Due to Adverse Police Reports. Court Dismisses Petitions Seeking Leave for Convicts Convicted of Heinous Offences, Holding That Prison Authorities' Discretion Under Tamil Nadu Prison Rules Must Be Exercised Based on Objective Assessment of Threat to Public Order.

28 Apr 2026

The judgment involves four writ petitions filed by family members of convicts seeking ordinary leave for the convicts. The petitioners are Rajammal (m...

High Court

Bombay High Court Allows Convict's Furlough Extension in Calendar Year Computation Case — Prison Authorities' Interpretation of 'Calendar Year' Held Incorrect. The court held that furlough leave spilling over from one calendar year cannot be deducted from the next year's entitlement under Rule 4(C)(4) of the Prisons (Bombay Furlough and Parole) Rules, 1959.

13 Nov 2024

The petitioner, a life convict lodged at Yerawada Open Prison, Pune, filed a writ petition seeking extension of his furlough leave by 17 days. He had ...

High Court

High Court of Karnataka Allows Parole for Convict in NDPS Case Despite Bar Under Section 32A — Distinguishes Parole from Remission. The Court held that Section 32A of NDPS Act does not bar parole as parole is a temporary release for a specific purpose and not a remission or suspension of sentence.

26 Jul 2023

The petitioner, Arjun S/o Lakkappa Hurakannavar, a convict under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (NDPS Act), was serving his ...

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Dismisses Convict's Petition in Parole Sentence Computation Case Under Haryana Good Conduct Prisoners Act. Court Held Parole Period Excluded from Total Sentence as Per Statutory Provision Section 3(3) and Precedents, Upholding High-Powered Committee Decision.

24 Mar 2023

The dispute originated from a writ petition filed under Article 32 of the Constitution of India by a convict serving life imprisonment in Haryana for ...

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Quashes Furlough Grant to Convict in Rape Case Due to Threat to Witnesses and Public Order. Furlough is not an absolute right but subject to conditions under the Bombay Furlough and Parole Rules, 1959, and must consider witness safety and public peace, as the convict had a criminal network and history of witness intimidation.

20 Oct 2021

The appeal arose from a judgment of the High Court of Gujarat dated 24 June 2021, which directed the release of the respondent on furlough. The respon...

High Court

Bombay High Court Refers Conflict on Emergency Parole for POCSO Convicts to Larger Bench. Interpretation of Rule 19(1)(C) of Maharashtra Prisons (Bombay Furlough and Parole) Rules, 1959 Requires Resolution of Conflicting Decisions on Entitlement of Convicts Under Section 376 IPC and POCSO Act.

6 Nov 2020

The petitioner, Pintu Uttam Sonale, a convict under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3, 4, and 5 of the Protection of Children from S...

High Court

Bombay High Court Strikes Down Discriminatory Furlough Condition in Maharashtra Prisons Rules as Unconstitutional. Residence-based classification for furlough eligibility violates Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution.

20 Oct 2020

The petitioners, Chandradev @ Chandu S/o Pareshwar Rai and Satish S/o Ramchandra Ninapure, were convicted under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code a...

High Court

Bombay High Court Strikes Down Rule 19(2) of Bombay Parole and Furlough Rules, 1959 as Unconstitutional — Mandatory One-Year Gap Between Parole Releases Violates Article 14 and 21. Rule 19(2) held arbitrary and irrational for imposing blanket bar without considering individual circumstances.

14 Mar 2019

The petitioner, Kantilal Nandlal Jaiswal, a life convict undergoing sentence for murder under Section 302 read with Section 149 IPC, along with other ...

High Court

Bombay High Court Upholds Cutting of Remission for Late Return from Parole but Orders Refund of Illegal Deposit. Parolee's two-day delay in reporting back to prison justified cutting remission by two days, but the condition requiring deposit of Rs.15,000 for grant of parole is illegal and must be refunded.

30 Jan 2019

The judgment concerns two criminal writ petitions filed by life convicts challenging the cutting of remission for late return from parole and seeking ...

1 2 3

Full Name * Username * Mobile Number * Email Address * State/UT * City * Password * Confirm Password * Referral Code (Optional)