An Inmate Cannot Be Denied Benefit Of Furlough Merely Because He Was Convicted For Sexual Offences: Delhi High Court
The Delhi High Court observed that the benefit of furlough cannot be denied to a convicted person merely because he committed sexual offences.
The Court allowed an Appeal challenging the order of Jail Authorities denying furlough to the convict. The Court emphasized that Rules 1197 and 1200 of the Delhi Prison Rules state that furlough is granted to enable the inmate to maintain continuity with his family and friends among other reasons.
Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma observed, “In this Court’s opinion, merely because a person has been convicted for committing sexual offences, he cannot be denied benefit of furlough, which he is otherwise eligible for, on such erroneous grounds”.
Advocate Faraz Maqbool appeared for Gopi Mallah and Additional Standing Counsel Anand V. Khatri appeared for the State/ Respondent.
A Writ Petition was filed challenging the order whereby the request for 3 weeks furlough was rejected. The Petitioner contended that he had already served 9 years and 7 months in custody and applied for furlough to maintain social ties with his family.
The Court noted that Gopi was convicted under Sections 325, 363 and 376 (2) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) and Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012. He was sentenced to undergo life imprisonment, and per the nominal roll, has remained in judicial custody for about 09 years and 07 months. He had remission earned of about 01 year and 08 months. The Court also noted that he was granted interim bail twice during the trial proceedings and had not misused such liberty.
Furthermore, the Court noted that no misconduct was reported against the convict. However, the Court observed that the jail authorities refused furlough merely because he was convicted of committing sexual offences.
“The Court remains conscious of the imprisonment awarded to the petitioner and the period of incarceration already undergone by him, coupled with the satisfactory conduct of the petitioner inside the jail and previous record of being released on interim bail and parole and having surrendered on time”, the Bench noted. The Court granted furlough to the Convict for a period of 21 days.
Accordingly, the Court allowed the Appeal and set aside the impugned order.
Cause Title: Gopi Nisha Mallah v State Of NCT Of Delhi (2023:DHC:7876)
