Bombay High Court Orders 7 Days Jail For Prison Superintendent For Denying Emergency Parole To Eligible Prisoners

Case: Hanuman Anandrao Pendam v State of Maharashtra

Coram: V.M. Deshpande & Amit Borkar

Case No.: Criminal Writ Petition No. 537/2021

Court Observation: “If the Court finds that the Government’s (officials) action in rejecting the grant of parole to a prisoner has the effect of suffocating the Articles 14 & 21 of the Constitution of India, in that case, the Court must act to restore the rule of law and respect the residuary fundamental rights of the prisoners,”

“The purpose of releasing a prisoner on parole or furlough is to reform him.. to give an opportunity to the prisoner to mix up with the members of his family and the Society so that he may feel that he is also a member of the Society,”

“Selective compliance of binding precedent (Milind Ashok Patil and Ors vs State of Maharashtra) not only has the adverse effect on rights of poor prisoners and affects the faith of prisoners in the administration of justice but also lowers the dignity of the Court by conveying that binding precedents of this Court can be selectively circumvented so as to frustrate the very object of such law of precedent, thereby undermining the dignity of the Court.”

“Where a person had persistently disregarded the Authority of the Court and has continued with his illegal act in violation of the binding precedent of this Court, in the facts of the case, it will be difficult for this Court to accept even unconditional apology even if made in the inception of the proceedings.”

“Simultaneous tendering of a justification and apology would be inconsistent with the concept of an apology. It is expected of a person tendering an unqualified apology not to render justification for the contemptuous conduct. Normally tendering of an apology is an act of remorse to purge the guilt of offence by the Contemnor. It cannot be permitted to be used as a universal formula to frustrate the action under the Contempt of Courts Act, particularly in cases where a person’s liberty is affected by selective application of the rule of law.”

Previous Posts

Courts to Ignore Violation of Principles of Natural Justice If Only One Outcome Is Possible in Facts of the Case: Punjab & Haryana High Court

Ayurvedic Doctors Entitled to Be Paid Salary at Par with Allopathic Doctors under NHM Scheme: Gauhati High Court

Distinction between Attachment of Property and Charge over Property: Gujarat High Court Explains

Power Of Attorney Must Be Construed Strictly; Agent Cant Sell Without Express Authorisation: Supreme Court

Plaint Liable To Be Rejected When Relief Sought Is To Restrain Defendant From Initiating Prosecution Against Plaintiff: Supreme Court

Hindu Undivided Family – No Presumption That Business Run By Karta In Tenanted Premise Is Joint Family Asset Download Judgement

Keywords

Prison Superintendent, Emergency Parole