Nature of crime no ground to deny

parole or furlough: SC
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court has ruled that a convict's nature and not the
nature of his crime was the determining factor for grant of parole, which
formed part of the reformative scheme to help convicts maintain links with
family and society to re-enter a normal life after the jail term.
Though it denied parole to 1993 serial train bomb blasts case convict Asfaq,
the SC examined the Central Parole Rules, 1955, and said the 62-year-old
provisions were archaic and sketchy and needed thorough recasting. It
suggested utilising modern research in criminology, which provided methods
to study the nature of convicts and their possibility of committing crime during
short-term release under parole or furlough.

Parole can be granted many times to a convict undergoing short-term

imprisonment and each parole period may extend up to one month. On the
other hand, furloughs are for a maximum period of 14 days granted a limited
number of times to a convict facing long-jail term.

Discussing the necessity of granting convicts parole or furlough as the case

may be, a bench of Justices A K Sikri and Ashok Bhushan said on Monday,
"Convicts too must breathe fresh air for at least some time provided they
maintain good conduct consistently during incarceration and show a tendency
to reform themselves and become good citizens."

Justice Sikri, writing the judgment for the bench, said, "The most important
ground is that a prisoner should be allowed to maintain family and social ties.
For this purpose, he has to come out for some time so that he is able to
maintain his family and social impact. This reason finds justification in one of
the objectives behind sentence and punishment, namely reformation of the
convict.

"When we recognise reformation as one of the objectives, it provides

justification for letting of even life convicts for short periods on parole, in order
to afford opportunities to such convicts not only to solve their personal and
family problems but also to maintain their link with society. Another objective
which this theory underlines is that even such convicts have a right to breathe
fresh air, albeit for periods." The court said many convicts relapsed into crime
because they left prison without a strong support network in the family and
society and no prospects of employment. "When offenders revert to criminal
activity upon release, they frequently do so because they lack hope of
merging into society as accepted citizens," it said. At the same time, the court
said public interest should be an important consideration for authorities in
deciding whether a convict deserved parole or furlough. "Public interest also
demands that those who are habitual offenders and may have tendency to
commit crime again after release on parole or having the tendency to
becom"Not all people in prison are appropriate for grant of furlough or parole.
Obviously, society must isolate those who show patterns of preying upon
victims.

"Yet, administrators ought to encourage those offenders who demonstrate a

commitment to reconcile with society and whose behaviour shows that they
aspire to live as law-abiding citizens. Thus, parole programme should be used
as a tool to shape such adjustments," the court added.e threat to law and
order of society should not be released on parole," it said.