IMPORTANT POINT
Failure to surrender after emergency parole indicates an intention to jump the parole, justifying the legality of the punishment notice. Future parole and furlough applications should be considered on their own merits.

JUDGMENT

Manmohan, J. (Oral) - Present appeal has been filed by a convict challenging the impugned order dated 10th May, 2022, whereby the Appellant's writ petition being W.P.(C) No. 780/2022 seeking quashing of punishment notice dated 12th October, 2021 was dismissed by a learned Single Judge of this Court. The Appellant in the said writ petition had also sought a direction to the Respondent to release him on furlough for three weeks.

2. It is pertinent to mention that vide notice dated 12th October, 2021, the Appellant had been directed to deposit Rs.10,000/- i.e. amount of personal bond executed by him at the time of his release on account of non-surrender after expiry of emergency parole on 14th February, 2021.

3. Learned counsel for the Appellant states that the learned Single Judge failed to appreciate that the Appellant had been previously granted parole four times and furlough thirteen times and he had punctually surrendered every time without misusing the liberty granted. He, however, states that due to communication gap during lockdown period, the Appellant could not surrender on time. He contends that the Appellant never intended to jump the emergency parole.

4. He also relies upon the judgment of the Supreme Court being In Re: Contagion of Covid-19 Virus in Prisons and Director General (Prisons), 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 238, wherein the convicts/under trials who were released on interim bail/emergency parole were directed to surrender within fifteen days from the date of the said order i.e. 24th March, 2023.

5. Per contra, learned counsel for the Respondent submits that the present appeal is not maintainable.

6. Leaving aside the issue of maintainability, this Court finds that the Appellant was released on 5th March, 2020 on furlough for a period of three weeks which was subsequently converted into an emergency parole on account of Covid-19 pandemic. At the time of his release, the Appellant had given the mobile number of his brother and surety, Maan Singh Thakur.

7. Subsequently, all the convicts who had been granted emergency parole on account of Covid were directed to surrender by way of a notice published in print media as well as electronic media. A message was also sent by the Jail Authorities on the mobile number of his brother and surety, Maan Singh Thakur asking the Appellant to surrender. Another message was sent on the mobile number of his neighbour, Santosh but the Appellant did not surrender. It is only after the lapse of six months (post expiry of emergency parole on 14th February, 2021), that the Appellant was rearrested by the police and sent to judicial custody on 9th September, 2021.

8. Consequently, this Court is of the view that the Appellant intended to jump the emergency parole. Accordingly, the notice dated 12th October, 2021 is legal and valid and the learned Single Judge has given cogent reasons for rejection of the writ petition.

9. However, keeping in view the order dated 24th March, 2023 passed by the Apex Court, it is clarified that any fresh application for parole and furlough filed by the Appellant shall be considered on its own merits, in accordance with rules, without being influenced by the punishment meted out to the Appellant in pursuance to the notice dated 12th October, 2021. With the aforesaid direction, the present appeal along with pending applications, being bereft of merit, is dismissed.

10. Let the order be communicated to the Appellant through concerned Jail Superintendent.