Justice Sandeep Moudgil, Punjab & Haryana High Court
Furlough Not A Guaranteed Right, Can Be Denied In Rarest Of Rare Cases: Punjab & Haryana High Court
|A life convict filed a petition under Articles 226/227 challenging the denial of four weeks’ furlough.
The Punjab and Haryana High Court has held that furlough is not an absolute or vested right of a convict and may be denied in the "rarest of rare" cases, particularly when it involves individuals categorized as "hardcore prisoners."
A petition was filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, read with Section 4 of the Haryana Good Conduct Prisoners (Temporary Release) Act, 2022. The petitioner convicted of murder for ransom and sentenced to life imprisonment had sought quashing of an administrative order that denied him four weeks of furlough. The petitioner argued that the order was arbitrary and against the principles of natural justice.
A Bench of Justice Sandeep Moudgil held, “It can be distinctly stated that parole and furlough are the parts of the penal and the prison system for humanizing prison administration but the two have different purposes. For the sake of the security of the society, furlough can be rejected on the rarest of the rare case. Furlough is not a matter of right” means it is not a guaranteed benefit; rather, it is a discretionary concession that may be granted or denied based on established criteria, circumstances, and the authority’s judgment."
Advocate Randeep Singh Dhull appeared for the Petitioner and Advocate Baljinder Singh Virk appeared for the Respondents.
In this case, the petitioner had already availed furlough/parole 16 times under the Parole Act, 2012. However, Section 3(4) of the Haryana Good Conduct Prisoners (Temporary Release) Act, 2022 specifically excludes "hardcore prisoners" from the benefit of furlough, and the Court found that the petitioner, convicted of a ransom-related murder, squarely fell within this excluded category.
The Court also made broader philosophical observations about the role of prisons and the nature of society. It stated, "there can't be a society without crimes. Man essentially is a fighting creature, thus to think about a crimeless society is meaningless. Laws are the guidelines of activities managing the direction of people in the public arena."
The Court added, “In the instant case, the petitioner being a hardcore prisoner as per section 3 sub section 4 of the Haryana Good Conduct Prisoners(Temporary Release) Act 2022 does not fulfil the criteria for being released on furlough, therefore, he cannot be granted the concession of furlough. It is to be borne in mind that the application for parole/furlough is to be decided as per the prevailing policy at the time of considering the application and not as per the policy that was prevalent at the time of conviction of accused.”
The judgment further noted that behaviour deemed acceptable under the law is considered lawful, while violations must be penalized according to the rule of law. It said, “The behaviours which are made passable under the law are treated as legitimate. The miscreant carrying out wrongdoing is rebuffed for his blame under the Rule that everyone must follow. Thus it can be stated that, The Institution of Prison is indispensable for every country (India) to punish, the convicted criminals and maintain law and order, peace and security, and a balanced ambiance in a country.
After thoroughly examining the petitioner’s history and the applicable statutory provisions, the Court concluded that he was not eligible for furlough. Given his status as a "hardcore prisoner" and the specific bar under Section 3(4) of the 2022 Act, the Court held that no grounds existed to interfere with the administrative decision denying him furlough.
The High Court dismissed the petition.
Cause Title: Sonu Alias Amar v. State of Haryana & Ors., [2025:PHHC:111391]