The Delhi High Court recently expressed dissatisfaction with the practice of submitting writ petitions to seek parole instead of going to the appropriate authorities. This observation was made by Justice Dinesh Kumar Sharma during the hearing of a case involving a man charged with gang rape and other offenses.
The individual had requested temporary release for two weeks or parole for 30 days. Furlough is a short-term release given during extended imprisonment to alleviate its repetitiveness, while parole is granted for shorter sentences and has specific conditions.
The petitioner stated that he had already been granted furlough and had undergone medical treatment. He also mentioned that he had submitted an application for a second period of temporary release or parole.
The prosecution’s counsel noted that there is an increasing trend of submitting writ petitions to the High Court for furlough instead of seeking assistance from the appropriate authorities in a timely manner.
Justice Sharma expressed disapproval of this practice and dismissed the petition since it was filed at the last minute. However, he stated that the prison superintendent should ensure the petitioner’s transportation to the hospital for his scheduled surgery on August 5. He also mentioned that the request for a subsequent period of temporary release should be addressed by the authorized body within three days.
