JANARDHAN DAGDU GORKHANDE Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. By consent heard both the sides for final disposal.

(2.) All these matters are filed to challenge the orders made by the respondents / Superintendent of Central Jail by which the applications which were made by the petitioner-prisoners for emergency parole are rejected. The submissions made and the record show that on the relevant date they had completed more than three years of jail term and otherwise they were eligible for getting emergency parole. The reason for rejection of emergency parole is given that they had not either availed parole or furlough leave at any time in the past or they had availed the parole or furlough leave only on single occasion. It is not contended that the prisoners who have availed parole or furlough leave on single occasion had turned up late to jail.

(3.) In the Government notification dated 08.05.2020 there is a condition that the prisoner ought to have availed parole or furlough leave at least on two occasions in the past and on previous two occasions he / she ought to have returned to jail in time. This condition is there to ensure that the prisoner will return to jail in time. In many cases the prisoners prefer not to avail remission or parole even when if they are eligible to avail that. Due to this reason only because the prisoners had not availed either parole or furlough leave in the past, that circumstance cannot come in their way to get the benefit of Government notification dated 08.05.2020. The interpretation of that condition is made by this Court in many matters. Due to this reason this Court holds that the reason given for rejection of emergency parole by respondents is not tenable in law. In the result, following order is passed: