A bench of Justices Shah and C T Ravikumar dismissed pleas of four lifers who had challenged the Goa government’s decision to discount the parole period from the number of years they are in prison.
The trial court had opined, like in Bilkis Bano gang-rape and multi-murder case, against their release by grant of remission of sentence because of the heinous offence committed by them.
The Bombay HC had dismissed the said writ petitions holding that the period of parole is to be excluded from the period of sentence while considering the 14 years to actual imprisonment for the purpose of premature release. The lifers had appealed against the HC verdict in the SC.
The question before the SC bench was – whether the period of parole is to be excluded from the period of sentence while considering 14 years of actual imprisonment for the purpose of premature release is to be considered?
Parole, sadly, has a class angle. The rich and the influential have used it to their advantage serving much lower periods in jail than their term indicates. The apex court should be lauded for not only spotting this flaw but also taking action against it.
Writing the judgment, Shah said, “If the submission on behalf of the prisoners that the period of parole is to be included while considering 14 years of actual imprisonment is accepted, in that case, any prisoner who may be influential may get the parole for number of times as there is no restrictions and it can be granted number of times.”
“If the submission on behalf of the prisoners is accepted, it may defeat the very object and purpose of actual imprisonment. We are of the firm view that for the purpose of considering actual imprisonment, the period of parole is to be excluded. We are in complete agreement with the view taken by the HC holding so,” Justice Shah said.
Rejecting the plea for inclusion of parole period with the period of actual incarceration as per Section 55 of the Prison Act, 1894, the SC said this provision shall be applicable in a case where a prisoner is taken out from any prison, he shall deem to have been in prison. “However, the same shall not be applicable with respect to release on parole,” it said.
The HC had relied upon 2006 Prison Rules 2006 which provided that the period of release on Furlough and Parole “shall be counted as remission of sentence ….”. SC agreed with the HC and said, “Once the period of parole is to be counted as remission of sentence, as rightly observed and held by the HC, the period of parole is also required to be excluded from the period of sentence while considering 14 years of actual imprisonment.”
