Anushka Sharma –
Published On: October 21, 2021 at 09:30 IST
The Supreme Court clarified the key differences between Furlough and Parole, as well as the rules Governing their Grant.
The Court cited several Precedents and stressed on the need of striking a balance between two opposing interests.
When the Bench made the observation, it was considering an Appeal from the Gujarat High Court, which granted two weeks’ Furlough to self-proclaimed God man and Rape prisoner Asaram’s son Narayan Sai.
According to a Bench led by Justice BV Nagarathna, Furlough is allowed to break the monotony of Imprisonment, while Parole is granted to the prisoner to address a specific need.
The Court went on to say that both Furlough and Parole have a time limit.
The Court stated, “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. The grant of Furlough must be balanced against the public interest and can be refused to certain categories of prisoners.”
The Bench also observed that there is no Legal Right for a prisoner to be freed on Furlough, citing the Bombay Furlough and Parole Rules.
The Bench stated that it is provided based on the need for it and after considering the Constraints.
The phrase “May be Released”in Rule 3 relating to the same implies the absence of an Absolute right, according to the Court.
Also Read: Parole and Furlough – Difference and Legal Provisions
Supreme Court to resolve if convicts jailed till death can be given furlough