Furlough must be balanced against public interest: SC
New Delhi: The grant of furlough must be balanced against the public interest and can be refused to certain categories of prisoners, the Supreme Court on Wednesday said as it set aside the Gujarat High Court order granting 14-day furlough to rape convict Narayan Sai, son of self-styled godman Asaram Bapu.
The top court said that Sai and his father have a mass following of persons who owe loyalty to them and there is a reasonable apprehension of disruption of public peace and tranquillity. A bench of Justices DY Chandrachud and BV Nagarathna allowed a plea of the Gujarat government challenging the June 24 order of the high court granting furlough to Sai. For the above reasons, we allow the appeal and set aside the impugned judgement and order of the High Court dated June 24, 2021, it said.
Analysing the Bombay Furlough and Parole Rules which are applicable in Gujarat, the bench said that the Rules do not confer a legal right on a prisoner to be released on furlough.
The grant of furlough is to break the monotony of imprisonment and to enable the convict to maintain continuity with family life and integration with society. Although furlough can be claimed without a reason, the prisoner does not have an absolute legal right to claim furlough, it said, adding that the grant of furlough must be balanced against the public interest and can be refused to certain categories of prisoners .
It said that grant of furlough is regulated by Rule 3 and Rule 4 and while Rule 3 provides the eligibility criteria for grant of furlough for prisoners serving different lengths of imprisonment, Rule 4 imposes limitations.
The use of the expression 'may be released' in Rule 3 indicates the absence of an absolute right. This is further emphasised in Rule 17 which states that said Rules do not confer a legal right on a prisoner to claim release on furlough. Thus the grant of release on furlough is a discretionary remedy circumscribed by Rules 3 and 4, the bench said.
It said as principles formulated in broad and general terms, while parole is granted for the prisoner to meet a specific exigency, furlough may be granted after a stipulated number of years have been served without any reason. Dealing with the case, the bench said that the furlough application of Sai was rejected by the DGP by an order dated May 8, 2021, who had relied on the concurrent opinion of the ACP, DCP, and Jail Superintendent to deny the grant of furlough.
It noted that the Jail Superintendent has given a negative opinion based on the fact that the respondent kept a mobile phone inside the jail illegally and attempted to make contacts with the outside world.
