1. Application for parole by a convict who has completed over 24 years of actual custody without previous release on parole. (Para 4 )
Back
Next 
2019 Supreme(SC) 629
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Uday Umesh Lalit, M.R. Shah, JJ.
Mohammed Shamsuddin - Appellant
Versus
State Of Rajasthan - Respondent
Writ Petition (Criminal) No.235 of 2018
Decided On : 17-01-2019
Important Points
IMPORTANT POINT
A convict in custody for 24 years without any parole is entitled for parole.
A convict in custody for 24 years without any parole is entitled for parole.
Subject
Prisoner Rights - Parole
Headnote
Parole - Applicant in custody for 24 years without parole - Parole granted with conditions. (Para 6)
(2017) 15 SCC 55 - Relied upon
WP(Cr) No.158/2018 - Referred
Asfaq v. State of Rajasthan, (2017) 15 SCC 55 - Relied upon [Para 1]
Mohammed Amin v. State of Rajasthan, WP(Cr) No.158/2018 - Referred [Para 3]
Facts of the case:
This is an application for parole.
Finding of the Court:
Applicant is entitled to parole.
Result: Parole granted for 21 days.
Legal Category Hierarchy
Advocates appeared:
For the Appellant : Ratnakar Dash, Sr. Adv., Mohd. Irshad Hanif, Advs.
For the Respondent: Ms. Ruchi Kohli, Ms. Srishti Mishra, Ms. Madhavi Divan, ASG, Rana Mukherjee, Sr. Adv., Rajiv Nanda, Ms. Manjula Gupta, B.V. Balaram Das, Advs.
For the Appellant : Ratnakar Dash, Sr. Adv., Mohd. Irshad Hanif, Advs.
For the Respondent: Ms. Ruchi Kohli, Ms. Srishti Mishra, Ms. Madhavi Divan, ASG, Rana Mukherjee, Sr. Adv., Rajiv Nanda, Ms. Manjula Gupta, B.V. Balaram Das, Advs.
Table of Contents
2. State opposing parole based on prior judicial rejection — Petitioner seeking parole citing subsequent grants to co-accused and for family emergencies. (Para 2 , 3 )
3. Parole facilitates reformation, redemption, and rehabilitation by allowing convicts to maintain family and social ties and exercise the right to breathe fresh air. (Para 5 )
4. Reformation as a sentencing objective justifies granting short-term parole to convicts to maintain family ties and social links for rehabilitation. (Para 5 )
5. Petitioner transferred to another prison and granted 21 days of parole subject to reporting requirements and restrictions on communication with co-accused. (Para 6 )
6. What are the primary objectives and justifications for granting parole to convicts?
Parole is granted to allow prisoners to maintain family and social ties, supporting the objective of reformation. It enables convicts to solve personal problems, maintain social links, and breathe fresh air, which aids in their redemption and rehabilitation. (Para 5 )
7. How does the theory of criminology justify the release of life convicts on parole?
Criminology identifies deterrence, prevention, retribution, and reformation as goals of punishment. The objective of reformation justifies granting short-term parole to life convicts to facilitate their rehabilitation and maintain links with society. (Para 5 )
8. Is the granting of parole for prisoner rehabilitation considered to be in the public interest?
Yes, gestures by the State that promote the redemption and rehabilitation of prisoners through parole are ultimately aimed at the good of society and are therefore in the public interest. (Para 5 )
ORDER :
1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. Ms. Madhvi Divan, learned Additional Solicitor General relied on the decision of this Court in Asfaq v. State of Rajasthan & Other, (2017) 15 SCC 55. She further invited our attention to paragraph No.31 of said judgment by which request for parole was rejected by this Court.
3. Mr. Ratnakar Dash, learned Senior Counsel on the other hand, relied upon subsequent Order dated 14.05.2018 passed by this Court in the matter of very same person-Asfaq, which order granted him parole for 21 days on the ground that his mother had expired. Mr. Dash invited our attention to order dated 06.08.2018 passed by this Court in Writ Petition(Criminal) No.158/2018 (Mohammed Amin v. State of Rajasthan & Ors.) in connection with another co-accused from the same trial who was also granted parole for 21 days.
4. In the present case, the petitioner has completed more than 24 years of actual custody and has never been released on parole. However, during the pendency of the trial, under the orders of this Court, the petitioner was transferred from Central Prison, Jaipur to Central Jail, Gulbarga for some period.
5. We may at this stage quote the observations of this Court in para 17 of its judgment in Asfaq v. State of Rajasthan (supra) which are:-
"17. From the aforesaid discussion, it follows that amongst the various grounds on which parole can be granted, the most important ground, which stands out, is that a prisoner should be allowed to maintain family and social ties. For this purpose, he has to come out for some time so that he is able to maintain his family and social contact. This reason finds justification in one of the objectives behind sentence and punishment, namely, reformation of the convict. The theory of criminology, which is largely accepted, underlines that the main objectives which a State intends to achieve by punishing the culprit are: deterrence, prevention, retribution and reformation. When we recognise reformation as one of the objectives, it provides justification for letting of even the life convicts for short periods, on parole, in order to afford opportunities to such convicts not only to solve their personal and family problems but also to maintain their links with the society. Another objective which this theory underlines is that even such convicts have right to breathe fresh air, albeit for (sic short) periods. These gestures on the part of the State, along with other measures, go a long way for redemption and rehabilitation of such prisoners. They are ultimately aimed for the good of the society and, therefore, are in public interest."
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and more particularly the fact that the petitioner is in custody for more than 24 years, we pass following directions:
(a) The petitioner who is presently lodged in Central Jail, Jaipur shall be transferred to Gulbarga Central Prison. Such transfer shall be effected within next ten days. The petitioner shall continue to be lodged in Gulbarga Central Prison till further orders by this Court.
(b) Within five days of such transfer, the petitioner shall be released on parole for a period of 21 days subject to the condition that he shall report to the Chowk police station, Super Market, Gulbarga everyday between 10.30 A.M. to 12.00 Noon.
(c) While on parole, the petitioner shall remain in Gulbarga and shall not go out of Gulbarga.
(d) On completion of 21 days of parole, the petitioner shall surrender himself with the concerned Police Station, namely, Chowk P.S., Gulbarga who shall then lodge the petitioner back in the Central Prison, Gulbarga.
(e) This parole is granted so that the petitioner can maintain his relations with family. The facility of parole shall not be misused in any manner for being in communication with either the co-accused or persons involved in the crime.
(f) Any infraction or violation of this order will entail serious consequences.
7. Copies of this order shall immediately be sent
