Back
Who Jumped for 40 Years, Became Teacher: Upholds Penalty
Justice T. Madhavi Devi Dismisses Writ, Directs Creation of Tracking Mechanism for Parolees
In a remarkable case of prolonged evasion, the has refused to interfere with the punishment imposed on a who failed to return after a 30-day in 1984, remained at large for over four decades, secured a government teaching job, and even won a Best Teacher Award before being apprehended.
Justice Tangirala Madhavi Devi upheld the forfeiture of the convict's earned of approximately 27 days and the denial of and for three years. The Court also directed the State government to devise a robust system to track prisoners on and to constitute Special Task Forces for strict vigilance.
The Case Background
The convict, Sandela Veeranna, was sentenced to life imprisonment in for murder with common object () and rioting (). He was released on from on . His was extended until , and he was due to surrender the following day.
Instead of returning, Veeranna vanished. He moved to Mahabubabad District, secured employment as a government teacher, worked until his retirement in , and even received a Best Teacher Award in . For 40 years, 1 month and 28 days, prison authorities had no trace of him.
He was finally apprehended by a from on and transferred to . Following his arrest, a was issued for his prolonged overstay. After hearing his explanation, the imposed the penalty in —forfeiture of all earned and a three-year ban on and .
Challenging that order, his wife, Sandela Charamma, filed the present before the High Court.
Arguments Presented
Petitioner’s Submissions: - The authorities had not taken any steps to arrest the convict for four decades, despite his open residence and government employment. - The punishment was issued mechanically and without proper opportunity to be heard. - The convict is now 73 years old and suffers from serious medical ailments requiring specialized treatment. The three-year ban on effectively prevents him from seeking temporary release even on medical grounds. - Reliance was placed on the decision in , which emphasized a humanitarian approach while considering on medical grounds.
State’s Response: - Several communications were made to police authorities between and to trace the convict, but he could not be located at his last known address. - The convict had served only six months and seven days of his life sentence before jumping and had . - He obtained a government job by deception, without disclosing his criminal conviction. - Adequate medical facilities, including a 50-bed hospital, are available at , with referral options to specialist hospitals in Hyderabad if needed. - The punishment imposed followed the procedure under , and .
Legal Analysis and Reasoning
The Court noted that the convict had been given a and an opportunity to explain his overstay. The explanation was rejected on merits, and the punishment was imposed in accordance with the prison rules. Consequently, there was no violation of the .
The Court distinguished the Kailash Wati case, observing that the convict in that precedent was 81 years old, bedridden, and had already served half of a seven-year sentence—circumstances not present in this case. “Every case has to be considered in the peculiar facts and circumstances of that case,” the Court held.
The Court also took a stern view of the convict’s conduct in securing a government job while concealing his criminal past. It observed that he had “” and had “.”
The medical condition pleaded by the petitioner was not considered a sufficient ground for relief, as the prison authorities confirmed that necessary medical care could be provided within the prison system.
Key Observations
“It is clear that the convict has intentionally evaded the arrest and his contention that he was appointed as a Government teacher and worked as such till the date of superannuation also goes to prove that he has intentionally not disclosed about the conviction and has . The petitioner’s husband has been successful in leading the prime period of his life out of prison and enjoyed all the benefits.”
“This instance of not being able to track a prisoner for a period of forty years during which, he gets appointed to a Government job and renders service without interruption till he attains the age of superannuation reflects poorly on the attempts of the jail authorities in keeping track of the prisoner when they are granted without guards and would embolden many others to adopt such methods of overstayal and deception.”
The Court’s Decision
The dismissed the , finding no merit in the challenge to the punishment order. It directed the and prison authorities to:
- Frame guidelines and necessary machinery to keep track of prisoners granted and ensure they report back on expiry of the period.
- Constitute Special Task Forces to maintain strict vigilance over prisoners who are on .
The Court refrained from imposing costs.
The judgment sends a clear message that abuse of liberal provisions will not be countenanced, and that prison authorities must be proactive in monitoring those temporarily released. It also highlights the need for systemic reforms to prevent such egregious lapses in the future.
