(1.) An undated letter addressed to this court, sent by post by a convict, lodged in jail undergoing life imprisonment, has been converted into the instant writ petition. It reveals a persistent and deeply troubling pattern i.e. for the fourth time, the convictprisoner has been compelled to invoke the jurisdiction of this Court for no reason other than his poverty and inability to furnish surety and the persistent mechanical approach of the competent authority by imposing an onerous condition of furnishing of sureties for actual release on duly sanctioned parole. On three earlier occasions, the petitioner was similarly forced to approach this Court solely because the authority insisted upon the furnishing of sureties, in addition to a personal bond, as a precondition for release on parole. The said insistence was categorically rejected and waived by this Court each time.
(2.) Notwithstanding the petitioner's financial incapacity, and repeated, unequivocal and favorable judicial indulgence by waiver of the condition of furnishing sureties in past, the competent authority while sanctioning parole has, yet again, with complete nonchalance, imposed the very same condition for the fourth parole, directing the petitioner to furnish two sureties of Rs.25,000.00each. What is particularly disturbing is the mechanical reimposition of an identical condition for the fourth time, despite it's earlier waiver, not once but thrice by this Court. Regrettably, it reflects a disturbing institutional apathy to the rule of law. More of it, later.
(3.) Succinct facts first.