HC fines Nashik jailor Rs 25,000 for rejecting parole to inmate

The Bombay high court has imposed a Rs 25,000 cost on the Nashik prison jailor for rejecting the parole application of a prisoner in contravention of law and despite not having the power to do so.

IMAGE: A view of the Bombay high court.Photograph: ANI Photo

Prisoner Shrihari Rajlingam Guntuka's parole application was rejected in September this year by the jailor, relying on a government circular of 2022 that mandated a gap of one-and-a-half years between the furlough and parole leave.

A division bench of Justices Bharati Dangre and Manjusha Deshpande in its order of November 12 said the courts in the past have passed an order, clearly stating that such an embargo was in contravention to the provisions of the Prisons (Bombay Furlough and Parole) Rules.

The court said a prisoner was entitled to avail parole leave in order to deal with an emergent situation and the imposition of a condition that he or she will have to wait for a period of one-and-a-half years is completely unreasonable.

"We have in the past clearly expressed our view that a contingency like serious illness of a near relation, natural calamities like house collapse, flood, fire, and earthquake is an unforeseen contingency and one cannot speculate as to when it will strike," the HC said.

The bench said it was really "unfortunate that the prison authorities have turned a deaf ear to the orders passed by courts and have continued to adopt their regime by rejecting applications".

The Nashik jail superintendent had rejected Guntuka's parole application on the ground that it was submitted within a short span of 21 days from his return to jail after furlough leave.

"We strongly deprecate the approach adopted by the Nashik jailor in defeating the rights of the petitioner. The respondent No 4 (jailor) has shown disrespect to the law laid down by this court," the HC said.

The bench directed the jailor to reconsider Guntuka's application for parole and forward the same to the authority concerned who has the power to decide.

"For denying the right of the petitioner in an arbitrary manner and in utter disregard to the law laid down by this court, we deem it appropriate to impose a cost of Rs 25,000 on the jailor to be paid personally to the petitioner within a period of four weeks," the court said.

The bench also directed for its order to be communicated to the Additional Chief Secretary of the state Home Department so that this "mistake of disregarding the law laid down is not repeated".

Guntuka, presently serving his sentence in Nashik central prison, had in September submitted a letter to the divisional commissioner, Nashik division, through the jail's superintendent seeking to be released on parole for his wife's surgery.

The jail superintendent instead of forwarding the letter rejected the same.

As per the superintendent, Guntuka had surrendered back in prison after his furlough leave only in August 2024.

The court said there have been several instances in the past, too, where it noted the judgments and orders passed by courts are not followed by jail authorities when it comes to the release of prisoners on parole or furlough under the Prisons (Bombay Furlough and Parole) Rules.