PAROLE AS A CORRECTIONAL MEASURE 1

PAROLE AS A CORRECTIONAL MEASURE: A CRITICAL STUDY
A TERM PAPER
Submitted to the
UNIVERSITY INSTITUTE OF LEGAL STUDIES (UILS)
PANJAB UNIVERSITY, HOSHIARPUR
For the degree of
LL.M. ONE YEAR COURSE (2023-2024)
SUBMITTED BY
SHIVANI RANA (ROLLNO.23217)
UNDER THE SUPERVISION OF

DR. POOJA SOOD
ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR OF LAW
UNIVERSITY INSTITUTE OF LEGAL STUDIES (UILS)
PANJAB UNIVERSITY, HOSHIARPUR
i
STUDENT’S DECLARATION
I, Shivani Rana, hereby solemnly declare that the Term paper titled “Parole as a correctional
measure: a critical study” is submitted to the University Institute of Legal Studies (UILS),
Panjab University, Hoshiarpur in partial fulfilment of the requirements of Master of Laws
(One year).
This is an original piece of my research work and all sources used to complete this Term
Paper have been duly acknowledged to the best of my knowledge. Also, no part of this
work has been submitted for any other degree in any other University/Institute.
Shivani Rana
Roll No. 23217

ii
SUPERVISOR’S CERTIFICATE
This is to certify that the Term Paper entitled “Parole as a Correctional Measure: A Critical
Study” carried out by Shivani Rana under the supervision of Dr. Pooja Sood and submitted
to the University Institute of Legal Studies is a piece of research carried out by the
candidate. No part of this work has been submitted for any other degree in any other
University/ Institute.
Signature of Candidate Supervisor

Dr. Pooja Sood
Associate Professor of
Law
University Institute of Legal
Studies (UILS)
Panjab University,
Hoshiarpur
iii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
Every mission needs a spirit of dedication and hard work but more than anything else,
it needs proper guidance, a working atmosphere, and more importantly support from others.
During the process of research work, I received a lot from others, directly or indirectly and
it is indeed a matter of great pleasure and privilege to acknowledge the same here.
I express my sincere gratitude to my Hon’ble Supervisor Dr. Pooja Sood, Associate

Professor of Law, University Institute of Legal Studies, Panjab University, Hoshiarpur
for showing me the path of sincerity and dedication. Her sincere advice in accomplishing
this venture is heartily acknowledged. I cannot express in words the tireless efforts she
has put into polishing and enriching the work. I am also thankful to faculty members
ofthe department, and library staff for providing the various reference books that came as
agreat source of research.
I ascribe the accomplishment of my work to my parents who have always been my pillars
of strength and stood by me with their blessings and who have motivated and inspired
me to complete my work.
I would ever remain indebted to the authors of various books, research articles, journals, and
reports, that I have used as source material.
Shivani Rana
Roll no. 23217
iv
PREFACE
This research report is submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the
ward of the degree of “Mater of Law 1 year”. The research report is prepared for
the research completed during the course of LL.M. 1st semester undertaken at
Panjab University, Chandigarh.
This research report represents the researcher’s exploration into the “concept of
criminology and victimology”, specifically focusing on “parole as a
correctional measure”. My research aims to get knowledge about parole as a
correctional tool to reform and rehabilitate offenders while safeguarding
society at the same time. This research further highlights the issues relating
to parole and ways in which such issues can be resolved.
Both Indian and foreign, sources have been relied upon and used and have
been referred to and acknowledged in footnotes as source material.
References, bibliography, webliography, table of cases, table of contents and
abbreviation used are incorporated in the report that will be useful for more
curious readers.
The researcher expresses her gratitude to Dr. Pooja Sood, assistant Associate
Professor of Law, University Institute of Legal Studies (UILS) Panjab University,
Hoshiarpur whose guidance, support, and valuable insights have played a major in
shaping this research.
It is sincerely hoped that this research will be found to be useful by teachers,

researchers, and students of law. And inspires curiosity, nurtures intellectual
growth and contributes to the collective knowledge in the field of Criminology and
Penology.
Shivani Rana
Roll no. 23217
v
ABBREVIATIONS
1. AIR - All-India Reporter
2. BPR&D - Bureau of Police Research & Development
3. CRPC - Code of Criminal Procedure
4. CRL - Criminal Appeal
5. CREF - Civil Reference
6. CRILJ - Criminal Law General
7. DCW - Delhi Commission for Women
8. DLT - Delhi Law Times
9. INC - Incorporated
10. HC - High Court
11. JT - Judgement Today
12. NCT - National Capital Territory
13. NCRB - National Crime Records Bureau
14. NDTV - New Delhi Television Limited
15. NGO - Non-Government Organization
16. NUJS - National University of Judicial Science
17. ORS - Others
18. PIB - Press Information Bureau
19. SC - Supreme Court
20. SCC - Supreme Court Cases
21. SIC - Sentence Implementation Courts
22. SLP - Special Leave Petition
23. UOI - Union of India
24. USLR - University School of Law and Research
25. V. - versus
vi
LIST OF CASES
1. Bhikabhai v. State of Gujarat & others AIR 1987 Guj 136, (1987) 2 GJR 1178
2. Maharashtra and Another v. Suresh Pandurang Darvekar. AIR 2006 SC 247
3. Smt. Poonam Lata v. Wadhaman & others AIR 1987 SC 1383
4. Ashfaq v. The state of Rajasthan (2017) 15 SCC 55
5. Asha ram v. State of Rajasthan CRWP 613/2023
6. Natia Jiria v. State of Gujarat 1984 CriLJ 936, (1984) 1 GLR 464 GJ
7. Mohd Sabir v. State of Punjab CRWP 10719/2020
8. Ramamurthy v. The State of Karnataka (1997) 2 SCC 642
9. Krishna Lal v. State of Delhi AIR 1976 SC 1139
10. Hiralal Mallick v. State of Bihar (1977) AIR 2236
11. Babulal Das v. The State of West Bengal AIR 1975 SC 606
12. Samir Chatterjee v. State of West Bengal AIR 1975 SC 1165
13. Gurdeep Bagga v. Delhi, Administration 32 (1987) DLT 57 a
14. Kesar Singh v. State of Himachal Pradesh 1985 CriLJ 1202-1205
15. Dharambir v. State of Uttar Pradesh 1979 AIR 1595
16. Sunil filchand Shah v. UOI 1988 Crl 248
17. Gudikanti Narasimhulu and Ors. V. Public Prosecutor AIR 1978 SC 429
18. Ramesh Kuman v. State of Rajasthan & Ors 2013 CREF 01
19. Veerumchanni Raghvendra Rao v. State of Andhra Pradesh 1985 CriLJ 1009
(SC)
vii
20. Arvind Yadav v. Ramesh Kumar and others AIR 2003 SCW 2550
21. Saibanna v. State of Karnataka (2005) JT 5 S.C. 567
22. Krishan v. State of Haryana (1997) CriLJ 3180
23. Bidya Bhusan Mohanty v. State of Orissa and Anr. (2007) CriLJ 2187
24. Smt. Sharda Jain v. State (2010) 167 DLT 655
25. Sunil Fulchand Shah v. UOI (2000) 1 SCR 945
26. Somesh Gupta v. State of the NCT of Delhi (2010) 1 crimes 864
viii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Student’s declaration
Supervisor’s certificate
Acknowledgement
Preface
List of abbreviations
List of cases
CHAPTER- I INTRODUCTION
1.1. Significance of Study
1.2. Review of Literature
1.3. Objectives of the Study
1.4. Scope and Limitations of the Study
1.5. Research Methodology
1.6. Hypothesis
1.7. Scheme of the Study
CHAPTER- II BACKGROUND AND HISTORICAL EVOLUTION OF PAROLE AS A
CORRECTIONAL MEASURE
2.1. Concept of Parole
2.2. Definition of Parole
2.3. Origin of Parole
2.4. Jurisprudence of Parole
CHAPTER- III LEGAL FRAMEWORK
3.1. Parole in India
3.2. Legal Framework of Parole in Indian Law
3.2.1 Types of Parole in India
3.2.2 Important Guidelines in India
3.3. Judicial Perspective
CHAPTER- VI CRITICAL ISSUES IN PAROLE
4.1. Misuse of parole
4.2. Refusal of Parole
4.3. Other issues in Parole
CHAPTER- V CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTIONS
5.1. Suggestions
5.2. Conclusion
BIBLIOGRAPHY
WEBLIOGRAPHY
1
CHAPTER-1
INTRODUCTION
Crime and criminals are two essential components of the criminal justice
system. Since the beginning of human civilization, crime has been a perplexing
problem. no society exists without the problem of crime and criminals. the idea
of a crimeless society is a myth. Emile Durkheim while commenting on the
aspect of the criminal problem in this treatise “Crime as a normal
phenomenon” says, “A society composed of persons with angelic qualities
would not be free from violations of norms of the society. Crime is a dynamic
concept changing with the social transformation.” He further argues that Crime
is considered an essential aspect of every society because it arises from the
diverse and often conflicting interests of different groups within the social
structure. These conflicts eventually lead to criminal incidents.
The concept of crime is essentially concerned with social order. Man’s

interests are best protected as a member of the community. Everyone owes
certain duties towards their fellow human beings and at the same time has certain
rights and privileges which he expects others to safeguard for him. This sense of
mutual respect and trust for the rights of others regulates the conduct of the
members of the community. Although most people believe in the ‘live and let
live’ principle there are few individuals who for some reason or the other, deviate
from this normal behavioural pattern and associate themselves with antisocial
elements.
This imposes a responsibility on the state to maintain social order by

safeguarding law-abiding citizens and punishing the lawbreakers through legal
means. punishment is one of the oldest methods of controlling crime and
criminality. Punishment under law is the authorised imposition of deprivations of
freedom or privacy or other facilities to which a person otherwise has a right, or the
imposition of special burdens because he has been found guilty of some criminal
violation. Though punishment in its nature is an evil it is an inevitable evil so far
protection of society from criminals is concerned.
2
To punish criminals is a recognised function of all civilised States. Normally state

uses the preventive theory of punishment where criminals are confined to prison and are
physically incapacitated from committing a crime. The most dangerous criminals may be
sentenced to imprisonment for life or even a sentence of death may be invoked for
heinous and brutal crimes such as murder etc. prisonization can also be used as a sort of
institutional placement of undertrials and suspects during the period of trial.
The evolution of society and development in the field of criminal science has
brought a radical change in the way criminologists think about crime and criminals. Now
individualised treatment has become the cardinal principle for the reformation of
offenders. This view finds its root in the reformative theory of punishment. As against
deterrent, retributive and preventive punishment, the reformative approach aims at
bringing change in the attitude of offenders to rehabilitate them as law-abiding members
of society. Punishment is used as a measure to reclaim the offender rather than to torture
or harass him. This theory advocates the human treatment of inmates inside the
correctional institution. The theory is based on the notion that various circumstances
force an individual to commit a crime, so he must get an opportunity for rehabilitation.
This theory also advocates that we should hate the crime and not the criminal.
In the Indian context, as rightly pointed out by Justice V.R. Krishna Iyer, "radical
humanism and progressive penology must gravitate towards the processes which heal
and humanise, restore and socialise and reconcile judicial punishment with the dignity of
personhood". Continuing further he observed, that every saint has a past and every sinner
a future. And the technology of rehabilitation is the key to the manifestation of the
divinity already in man." According to him, "the cultural roots of India, with Valmiki the
greatest poet with a robber past and such instances of conversion from criminality to
nobility, fully corroborate with the correctional philosophy advocated by radical
penologists."
India holds the widely accepted belief that imprisonment is justifiable only if it
ultimately contributes to the protection of society against crime. This objective can only
be achieved if imprisonment motivates and prepares the offender for a law-abiding and
seft-sustaining life after his release. It further acknowledges that imprisonment deprives
a prisoner of his liberty and self-determination, the prison system should not aggravate
3
the suffering already inherent in the incarceration process. Thus, certain categories of
offenders who pose a threat to public safety need to be segregated from the mainstream
of society by way of imprisonment, and every possible effort should be made to ensure
that they emerge from prison as better individuals than they were at the time of their
admission.
The dull and rigid prison environment offers little chance for offenders to
rehabilitate themselves. Moreover, when a convict is released after serving his sentence,
society becomes reluctant to see them as non-criminals and treat them as criminals
forever. As a consequence of society rejecting them, they go to law-violating groups
where he has been accepted. This frustrates the purpose of punishment. Therefore,
releasing prisoners during their imprisonment period increases the opportunities for their
correction, reformation and rehabilitation into society.
For the reformation and rehabilitation of offenders’ various correctional tools

emerged, however, parole is one of the most acceptable tool of them all. Parole is a social
control weapon that is used for implementation of the reformative or rehabilitative
measures through which the humanity aspect even towards criminals is reflected. Parole
is the premature release of a prisoner before the expiry of his sentence on some
conditions, if he violates such conditions, he must return to the prison to complete his
sentence. Parole plays an important role in the life of prisoners who at a certain point in
time committed crimes but later wished to change themselves and live in a society like a
normal human being. its objective is twofold: the rehabilitation of the offender and the
protection of society. It is a means of helping the inmate to become a law-abiding citizen,
while at the same time ensuring that he does not misbehave or return to crime.1
The objectives of the concept of parole rules are discussed by the Full Bench of
the Gujarat High Court in the case of Bhikabhai v. State of Gujarat & others2. The Full
Bench has referred to the report submitted by the All-India Jail Manual Committee and
also the objects mentioned in the Model Prison Manual.
1
Bruce, Vichert & Walte, Zahnd, ‘Prole: low and high-risk parolees’, Canadian Journal of Corrections, Vol VII,
Issue I, 39-48 (1965)
2
AIR 1987 Guj 136, (1987) 2 GJR 1178
4
These objects are:
i) To enable the inmate to maintain continuity with his family and deal with
family matters;
ii) To save the inmate from the evil effects of continuous prison life;
iii) To enable the inmate to maintain constructive hope and active interest in
life.
It further stated in para 13 of the said judgement that the parole rules are part of
the penal and prison system to humanise the prison system. These rules enable the
prisoners to obtain their release and return to the outside world for a short-prescribed
period.
Parole is recommended as the best measure to reclaim offenders to society as

reformed persons. However, it also has a negative aspect i.e. misuse of parole. In recent
times it has been witnessed that parole is being misused by rich and politically influential
classes to escape prison. Some of the most famous cases are the Manu Sharma case,
Bibi Jagir Kaur case, and Baba Ram Rahim case which are discussed further in
Chapter- IV. There are many such instances where the Parole granted to the prisoner was
being misused by him to escape or to tamper with evidence. There have also been such
instances whereby parole is granted to the person who does another criminal activity or
activity of a similar nature. In opposite to this, poor and uninfluential prisoners have no
means to utilize parole facilities effectively because authorities reject or refuse their plea
of parole on unjustifiable and flimsy grounds. These critical issues must be looked upon
so that the concept of parole can work properly in our criminal justice system
1.1. Significance of the study
The parole system in India has been subject to widespread criticism, sparking
heated discussions and opposition. Striking a balance between individual freedom and
interest of the society is important while formulating legal policy and an integral aspect
5
of justice. The Positivist school advocates for rehabilitation, whereas the classical
approach highlights the inherent risks of the parole system. The parole system must
establish a foundation for the ultimate release of the inmate, incorporating safeguards to
mitigate the inherent risks it presents.
Exploration of parole as a corrective measure is of utmost importance given its

potential impact on the criminal justice system, society’s welfare, and the overall
rehabilitation of offenders. Parole is a correctional measure that is used to reform or
rehabilitate prisoners. parole is a temporary release from prison on a promise of good
behaviour. There is no uniform law regarding parole in India, different states have
different laws regarding the grant of parole. the subjectivity and non-uniformity
throughout the country lead to significant confusion and differentiation. This means that
the inmates of different states could be subject to different criteria while seeking parole
to some extent. It is owing to the lack of codification of the parole law.
Moreover, it is important to recognize the possibility of parole law being

exploited by certain offenders, which could pose a risk to lives. Individuals seeking
parole, particularly those with political backing and influence, could become potential
threats to victims. When it comes to the rights of the victim versus the rights of the
accused, there should be no room for subjective opinions. In any scenario, priority must
be given to the rights of the victim. Consequently, the issue arises of how to prevent the
misuse of such laws.
The existing Prison Act and regulations lack adequacy in providing

comprehensive reports and understanding the psychological ability of prisoners to
reintegrate into society. Due to the absence of clear guidelines, essential factors are
frequently overlooked, contributing to repeated offences and increased criminal
activities. Instances like the Saibanna v. State of Karnataka and the Manu Sharma
(Jessica Lal Murder Case) case bring to light the lacunas in our system when it comes to
evaluating a convict's likelihood of committing serious crimes again and the potential for
the misuse of power.
There are thus many pertinent questions that need to be asked. Should we focus
on a more comprehensive plan for release than a mere mechanical and technical one?
6
Whether India should shift focus and take legislative steps to control the unrestricted
power of the executive concerning parole? Is the present legal framework in India
regarding parole effective in the reformation of parolees? What are the various issues that
are hampering the efficiency of parole?
The researcher finds this study significant because it would help us to understand
the concept of parole, its history, for what purpose it was created and the currently
existing legal framework in India. It would also help us depict the effectiveness of parole
as a correctional measure in the Indian criminal justice system. through this study, we
can understand the shortcomings of the existing laws and how can we rectify them.
1.2. Review of Literature
As part of the Traditional or Doctrinal Research, the researcher collected all the
data for this research study from different sources. They can be enumerated or classified
as Primary, Secondary and Tertiary. The authoritative primary sources of information
have been collected from The Prisoners Act, 1894, the Prisoners Act, 1900, The Delhi
Prisons Rules, 2000, The Prisons (Bombay Furlough and Parole) Rules, 1959 applicable
to Maharashtra and Gujarat and NCRB reports. The secondary sources of information
have been taken from various research papers, online articles, journals, websites, thesis
and books.
Dr. K. Sangeetha in her paper “A Critical Analysis on Law Governing Parole

in India”3, discussed about parole. She asserts that parole release is a component of the
rehabilitation process, aiming to grant an opportunity for prisoners to improve their
status. Parole, in this context, refers to the practice of temporarily releasing incarcerated
individuals by suspending their sentences by existing regulations. Additionally, she
emphasizes that parole is not an automatic entitlement; even if a prisoner presents a
compelling case for parole, the competent authority may deny it on valid grounds if
convinced that releasing the individual would be detrimental to society or prison
3
K., Sangeetha. “A Critical Analysis on Law Governing Parole in India”: Scholars International Journal, Crime
and Justice, 2019, Vol II Issue IX, 271-277
7
management. It's noteworthy that the time spent on parole doesn't count as a reduction in
the overall sentence.
Furthermore, she discusses the legal precedent set by the Supreme Court in the
case of the State of Maharashtra and Another v. Suresh Pandurang Darvekar. 4 The
court asserted that parole is essentially an executive function, and before recent
interventions by the court and certain high courts in India, instances of detenues being
released on parole were practically non-existent. These releases were granted based on
humanitarian considerations.
In an article titled "Revisiting the Concept of Parole System in India: Critical

Analysis,"5 Sushree Saswati Mishra asserts that parole serves a dual purpose beyond
merely relieving strain on the prison population. According to her, it is the final stage in
the reintegration of incarcerated offenders into society, forming a crucial component of
a rehabilitation plan initiated during their detention. Functioning as a correctional facility
between the prison and the outside world, parole is viewed as an optimal
therapeutic/healing response to criminal behaviour. Its significance lies in providing
parolees with a series of opportunities to acquire the skills necessary for a productive and
socially integrated life.
Mishra also points out the adverse impact of intense political and administrative
pressures on the effectiveness of parole administration. She argues that this intense
pressure has compromised the selection process, leading to parole being granted to
unsuitable offenders and, as a result, undermining the overall objectives of the program.
In Research titled “Parole as a Modus Operandi of Reformation and

Rehabilitation”6 Dr. Ambika believes that A conviction for a crime and subsequent
imprisonment should not engulf the dignity and fundamental rights of individuals. Parole
is not merely a state-granted benefit but a basic right available to prisoners, integral to
the rehabilitation process within any prison system. It is essential to maintain an
4
AIR 2006 SC 247
5
Mishra, S. Saswati. “Revisiting The Concept of Parole System in India: Critical Analysis”: NUJS Journal of
Regulatory studies, 2022, Vol VII Issue III, 71-84
6
Ambika. “Parole as a Modus Operandi of Reformation and Rehabilitation”: International Journal of Novel
Research and Development, 2023, Vol VIII Issue II, 981-1148
8
individualistic and humane approach as the cornerstone of rehabilitation. The

effectiveness of the parole system depends on factors such as the information available
to decision-making boards, the character and integrity of board members, and the
competence of parole officers. Parole should be granted generously. Our disapproval is
directed at the crime committed, not the individual. Our responsibility is to treat them
with the utmost humanity, providing them with an opportunity for reform.
Gayatri Pooja asserts in her research paper titled “Meaning and Concept of
Parole and Probation in India”7 that the criminal justice system aims to reform the
offender while ensuring the security of society and its people by addressing the actions
of the offender. It serves as a corrective measure. Achieving this goal isn't solely reliant
on incarceration; alternative measures such as parole, admonition with fines, and
probation are equally effective in fulfilling this purpose.
In a research paper, “Parole-The Reformative Instrument of Punishment in

Prisonisation”8 written by Mrs Nayana Medhi and Prof. AK Sinha, parole is
described as a social control tool that operates more efficiently than punitive measures.
They argue that parole involves treating prisoners with humanity to transform them from
criminals into responsible citizens. According to their perspective, parole serves as a
social instrument for rehabilitation, and the government is increasingly implementing
rules and regulations to uplift humanity among prisoners.
NSSR Murthy and Dr. MSV Srinivas assert in their article, "Indian Parole
System - A Review of Judicial Stand and Critical Issues,"9 that the concept of parole
is not a new idea. They emphasize parole as a transformative mechanism for convicts to
reintegrate into society, constituting a vital process for the social rehabilitation of
prisoners. in their study, they examined the concept of parole and provided an overview
of the Indian parole system. They also examined the judicial stance on parole, referencing
various court rulings. Additionally, the article elaborates on measures to prevent parole
7
Pooja, Gayatri. “Meaning and Concept of Parole and Probation in India”: Indian Journal of Law and Legal
Research, 2022, Vol IV Issue II, 766-781
8
Medhi, Nayana & Dr. Sinha, A.K. “Parole-The Reformative Instrument of Punishment in Prisonization”: The
Legal Frontier: Research Journal of USLR, USTM, 2016, Vol I Issue I, 110-123
9
Murthy, NSSR & Dr. Srinivas, MSV. “Indian Parole System - A Review of Judicial Stand and Critical Issues”:
International journal of innovative research & development, 2015, Vol IV Issue IX, 301-304
9
abuse, emphasizing the need to reconcile social security with human rights through the
parole system.
1.3. Objectives of the Study
The research intends to have the following as the objectives of the

present study:
 To understand the concept of parole in India and to analyse whether there

is a need for any reform in the current parole system.
 To analyse the number of key issues in the current parole system to attain
stability in the current parole system.
 To analyse jurisprudence to gain insights into the motive behind parole.
 To analyse various cases related to parole in India to know the judicial

view on parole.
1.4. Scope and Limitations of the Study
This present study is intended to be limited to analyse the concept of

parole in India. The researcher would also highlight various issues impeding
the concept of parole in India. The jurisprudence of the concept of parole to
know the reason and thought behind introducing the parole in jail system
would also be covered in this study. Various judicial proceedings will be
analysed the know the view of the judicial on parole. Ultimately, the
researcher will give some suggestions based on the knowledge gathered from
various sources so that the parole system can be administered well in India.
The present study suffers from certain limitations. The first and foremost
is the non-availability of unified legislation in this regard. The legislation that
governs the concept of parole i.e., The Prison Act, 1894 and The Prison Act
1900 all over India had no mention of parole in it. parole comes under the
10
state list hence states make to rules regarding the grand of parole in their
respective states.
1.5. Research Methodology
The method adopted for the present study is non-empirical or

doctrinal. This type of research is also known as traditional or pure theoretical
research. To comply with this kind of research, the researcher collected data
from Primary as well as Secondary sources. Under primary source of data, the
researcher collected first-hand data from substantial and relevant authorities.
Under the secondary course of data, the researcher collected published and
unpublished data from unauthoritative sources. The researcher also used the
Historical method to trace the origin and analyse the evolution of the parole
system in India. it is also proposed that a limited level of Qualitative Research
is used to analyse the statistical data to fulfil a fruitful research objective. The
researcher also proposes to use the Case Law Method of research to analyse
and elucidate various landmark judicial pronouncements to know the viewpoint
of the judiciary regarding parole.
1.6. Hypothesis
 The parole system, initially implemented with positive intentions to

rehabilitate prisoners, is now being exploited by prisoners with political
influence.
 there is a lack of uniformity in parole policies and practices among

different states resulting in inconsistencies in decision-making
procedures and eligibility standards.
 uniform legislation is needed for strengthening of parole system in order

the face the challenges posed by various factors.
11
1.7. Scheme of the Study
The researcher discussed the thesis in the following chapters
1. Introduction
2. Background and historical evolution of parole as a correctional
measure
3. Legal framework
4. Critical issues in parole
5. Conclusion and suggestions
In the first chapter “Introduction”, the researcher discusses her research

in a nutshell and also provides the Significance of her topic, Review of
Literature, Objectivities of the Study, Scope and Limitations of the Study,
Research Methodology and Hypothesis. The researcher also gives a detailed
plan of the research study undertaking and explains the scheme of the research
by pointing out the significance and relevance of each chapter that has been
discussed, the methodology of the study has also been discussed in detail and
the researcher has used doctrinal as the main methodology, in addition to this
the researcher has also adopted historical, quantitative, and case study method
to test the hypothesis.
In the second chapter “Background and Historical Evolution of

Parole as a Correctional Measure”, the researcher has tried to explain the
concept of parole, discusses whether parole is an absolute right or not and
defines parole with the help of definitions given in dictionaries, legislations and
by various jurists, scholars and criminologists. The researcher has tried to track
the origin of the parole system globally and how it originated in India. It also
explains the jurisprudence behind the concept of parole and what are the
various factors that led to the development of parole as a correctional measure.
In the third chapter “Legal Framework”, the researcher highlights the

legal provisions that govern the parole system in India. The researcher has
12
highlighted what legal provisions were made in support of the parole system in
India, how it evolved during the period, what reforms came to increase its
efficiency and what provisions exist now that regulate the parole system.
Furthermore in this chapter, it has been discussed how many types of parole
are there in our country and what important provisions are there that guide state
government and competent authority in granting parole. the researcher has
analysed through various precedents the perspective of the judiciary regarding
parole. In This chapter, it has been analysed what the judiciary thinks regarding
parole and how the judiciary plays its part in safeguarding the interest of
prisoners as well as the interest of society.
In the fourth chapter “Critical Issues in Parole”, the researcher

highlights two significant critical issues affecting the parole system in India. In
this chapter, it has been explained how on one hand parole is being misused by
rich and politically influential people whereas on the other hand, deserving
prisoners are being denied parole on frivolous and irrelevant grounds. Also,
this chapter provides for various other issues relating to parole such as lack of
uniformity in parole policies, insufficient resources and inadequate manpower,
and limited access to support services.
In the fifth chapter “Conclusion and Suggestions” the researcher gives

her pragmatic conclusion and suggestions for the research undertaken by her.
The researcher has enumerated various research findings and suggestions after
a critical analysis of the data. The researcher has pointed out various
suggestions after testing the Abovementioned hypothesis and the researcher
believes that these suggestions would be vital in the legislative process in
prison reforms. The researcher suggests that there should be a unified law that
will be applicable throughout the nation so no disparities in decision-making
processes and eligibility criteria should be there. The researcher also suggests
establishing a proper authority to govern the parole-granting process that will
properly evaluate the prisoner before granting him parole. Advanced
technology should be provided to the parole officers to monitor, guide and
support the parole after his release. After release support services should be
provided to the prisoner to reintegrate into society, to reboot his confidence, to
13
educate him, to provide vocational training, to provide job opportunities so that

he so doesn’t go back to the crime. The researcher also mentioned
recommendations made by the Second Administrative Reforms Commission
in its fifth report regarding parole as a suggestion.
14
CHAPTER-II
BACKGROUND AND HISTORICAL EVOLUTION OF PAROLE AS A
CORRECTIONAL MEASURE
2.1. Concept of Parole
Originally parole was a concept of military law where prisoners of war

were released from prison on a promise to return. But with the changing times
parole has become an integral part of the criminal justice system, intertwined
with changing attitude of the society towards crime and criminals. The concept
of parole as a correctional technique has its roots in the 19th century. The modern
parole system emerged in the mid-1800s. however, in India, it is comparatively
a new concept. Thus, the conceptualisation of parole becomes necessary.
parole is a pre-mature release of offenders after a strict scrutiny of long-

term prisoners, under the rules laid down by various governments. Pre-mature
release from prison is conditional subject to his behaving in society and accepting
to live under the guidance and supervision of a parole officer.10 Thus, parole is a
conditional release from prison granted to prisoners who have served part of their
sentence in prison. This conditional release ideally includes treatment through
measures of control, assistance and guidance the offender needs as they serve the
remainder of their sentence in society. is
During parole, the released prisoner stays under the custody and
supervision of the parole authority. The period of parole may be as long as the
time the prisoner would have otherwise served in the institution or it can also be
brought to an end earlier. At any point of time during the period of parole, it can
be revoked due to breach of parole conditions. In such a case, the violator is
required to return to the institution to serve his remaining sentence in
confinement.
The parole-based conditional release from prison can commence once the
10
Sironi, J.P.S. & Sironi, Sunil, Criminology and Penology, Haryana: Allahabad Law Agency (2023)
15
inmate has served a minimum of one-third of their entire sentence but before
their final discharge. In case of parole, part of the sentence is served and it is then
the convict is released on parole on the condition of good behaviour if he is found
to have improved and has abstained from criminal conduct, he gets remission of
the rest of the sentence and for some time at least a part of the sentence.11
Any prisoner can apply for parole through application to the competent
authority after completion of a specified portion of his sentence. However, a
question arises whether after completion of specified portions of the sentence the
prisoner will get guaranteed parole? or Can prisoners claim parole as a right?
In India parole is not recognised as a right despite being of administrative

importance. Parole is not an absolute right; it is purely the discretion of the
concerned authority to grant parole to the prisoner or to refuse the application for
parole. However, the grounds for refusal must be relevant. As mentioned in
Model Prison Manual, 2016, “release on parole is not an absolute right, though,
it is a legal right of every eligible prisoner as per the conditions laid down.” It is
a concession that is subject to cancellation if the prisoner becomes ineligible or
violates the condition of parole.
Parole is viewed as an act of grace and not as a matter of right and the
convict prisoner may be released on condition that he will stand by the promise.
It is a provisional release from confinement but is deemed to be a part of the
imprisonment.12 The Supreme Court on Smt. Poonam Lata v. Wadhaman &
others13, stated that parole is a grant of partial liberty or lessening of restrictions
to a convict prisoner, but release on parole does not in any way, change the status
of the prisoner.
Supreme Court defined parole in Asfaq vs The State of Rajasthan 14, “as
conditional release of prisoners i.e. an early release of a prisoner, conditional on
good behaviour and regular reporting to the authorities for a set period. Such a
11
Ibid
12
Prof. Paranjape, N.V., Criminology and Penology with Victimology, Allahabad U.P.: Central Law
Publications (2022)
13
AIR 1987 SC 1383
14
(2017) 15 SCC 55
16
release of the prisoner on parole can also be temporary on some basic grounds.
it is to be treated as mere suspension of the sentence for the time being, keeping
the quantum of the sentence intact. Release on parole is designed to afford some
relief to the prisoners in certain specified exigencies.”
In Asha Ram v. State of Rajasthan15, in this case, the application for 20-
day parole was put up by the offender who was convicted of the offence of sexual
assault on the grounds, he had already served 11 years of this jail term, that he
has satisfactory behaviour during his incarceration and his deteriorating health
due to old age and that he is eligible for parole in the parole rules,1958. The
parole committee rejected his application, citing that he did not meet the
eligibility criteria outlined in the Rajasthan Prisons Release on Parole Rules,
2021 which states that no offender is eligible who has committed sexual offences.
The convict approached the HC and the Hon’ble HC set aside the decision taken
by the district Parole Advisory Committee, Jodhpur and directed the respondents
to consider the application filed by the petitioner for releasing him on 20 days
parole afresh by the rules of 1956, instead of the provisions of the Rules of 2021.
In the case of Natia Jiria v. State of Gujarat16, the Gujarat HC asserted
that furlough is not a legal right available to prisoners but the rules of furlough
apply to all the prisoners and hence if one prisoner is granted furlough, it cannot
be denied to other.
In Mohd Sabir v. State of Punjab17, the petitioner sought a grant of parole
to facilitate him taking care of his widowed mother, who is an aged lady.
However, the case of the petitioner for grant of parole was considered and the
Senior Superintendent of Police reported that there may be a danger to the State
Authority/breach of peace, if the convict is released on parole and, as such, no
recommendation was made for release of the petitioner on parole. The Punjab
and Haryana HC held in this case that no recommendation has been made for
their release, but nothing as such has been specified about the manner, in which
the release of the petitioner on parole shall pose a danger to the State Authority
or may cause a breach of peace. The reason, so assigned in the impugned order
is quite vague. There is nothing, as such, mentioned in the custody certificate
15
CRWP 613/2023
16
1984 CriLJ 936, (1984) 1 GLR 464 GJ
17
CRWP 10719/2020
17
about the petitioner to have not maintained good conduct during his detention in
jail. Further, nothing is coming on record about the petitioner to have misused
the grant of parole, at any time. Therefore, parole was granted to the convict in
the present case.
From the above cases, it is understandable that though parole is not an
absolute right and it is the discretion of the competent authority to grant parole,
however, a prisoner cannot be denied parole where he is otherwise eligible. It is
their legal right to claim parole if they are eligible and authority cannot deny their
claims on irrelevant grounds
2.2. Definition of Prole
Various online dictionaries have defined the meaning of parole ‘Parole’

as defined in Black’s Law Dictionary is “a conditional release of a prisoner,
generally under the supervision of a parole officer, who has served part of the
term for which he was sentenced to prison. According to the Encyclopaedia of
Criminology, Parole is a method of conditional release of persons sentenced or
committed to penal or correctional institutions after serving a portion of the
sentence or term imposed by the court.18
Numerous criminologists, jurists, and scholars have also provided

definitions for the concept of parole. As defined by Prof. J.L. Gillin, “parole is
the release from a penal or reformative institution, of an offender who remains
under the control of correctional authorities in an attempt to find out whether he
is fit to live in the free society without supervision.19 Prof. Sutherland explains
parole as follows “Parole is the act of releasing or the status of being released
from a penal or reformatory institution in which one has served a part of his
maximum sentence, on condition of maintaining good behaviour and remaining
In the custody and under the guidance of the institution or some other agency
approved by the state until a final discharge is granted.”20 Another criminologist,
Donald Taft describes parole as a “release method that retains some control over
18
Branham, Vernon C. & Kutash, Samuel B., Encyclopedia of Criminology, USA, Literary Licensing LLC,
(1949) 285
19
Gillin, J.L., 6TH edition, Criminology and Penology, USA, Praeger Publishers Inc, (1971) 399
20
Sutherland & Cressey, 6th edition, Delhi, Surjeet Publications, (2011) 566
18
prisoners, yet permits them more normal social relationships in the community
and provides constructive aid at the time they most need it. According to him,
"parole" is a release from prison after part of the sentence has been served, the
prisoner remaining in custody and under stated conditions until discharged and
liable to return to the institution for violation of any of these conditions.” 21 Sir
Robert Cross has observed that “parole is the release of a long-term prisoner
from a penal or correctional institution after he has served a part of his sentence
under the continuous custody of the State and under conditions that permit his
incarceration in the event of misbehaviour.”22
As per the researcher, the legislations which define the meaning of parole
are, such as Delhi Prison Rules, 2018, which defines parole as “Parole means
the temporary release of a prisoner for a short period so that he may maintain
social relations with his family and the community to fulfil his familial and social
obligations and responsibilities. It is an opportunity for a prisoner to maintain
regular contact with the outside world so that he may keep himself updated with
the latest developments in society. It is however clarified that the period spent by
a prisoner outside the prison while on parole in no way is a concession so far as
his sentence is concerned. The prisoner has to spend extra time in prison for the
period spent by him outside the Jail on parole.”23 The Prisons (Bombay
Furlough and Parole) Rules, 1959, (Applicable to Maharashtra and
Gujarat) define parole with the help of the case of Smt. Poonam Lata v. M.L.
Wadhawan24 in which SC stated that it is a provisional release from confinement
but is deemed to be a part of the imprisonment. Release on parole is a wing of
the reformative process and is expected to provide an opportunity for the prisoner
to transform himself into a useful citizen. Parole is thus a grant of partial liberty
or lessening of restrictions to a convicted prisoner, but release on parole does not
change the status of the prisoner.
Thus, parole is a provisional release from prison who has served a portion
21
Taft, Donald & England, Ralph, Criminology, 4th Ed., New York, The Macmillan Company (1964) 485
22
Cross, Robert, The English Sentencing System, United Kingdom, Butterworths, (1981) 31-34
23
Delhi Prison Rules, 2018, 329
24
Supra 11
19
of his sentence in a correctional institute. However, this release is conditional

which the released prisoner has to follow.
2.3. Origin of Parole
The concept of parole emerged due to a strong belief in the principles of

reformation and rehabilitation. Prison life has changed due to the influence of
reformation and rehabilitation principles. Restorative approaches in the field of
penology have a relatively short history, gaining prominence only in the last three
decades. The shift from punitive to restorative methods is the result of liberal
developments in Western societies, particularly in the United States of America
and the United Kingdom. The evolution of the parole system within prison
administration was influenced by the contributions of several individuals who
served as leaders in various prisons around the world between the 1840s and
1867. They include Alexander Maconochie, Walter Crofton and Zebulon
Brockway.
In 1840, Maconochie became the governor of the harsh English penal

colony on Norfolk Island near Australia. Conditions were so terrible, that it is
said that men who were spared from being sentenced to death wept because of
how bad things were. The first thing Maconochie did was abolish the existing
flat sentence structure on Norfolk Island. Instead of forcing convicts to serve their
sentences without any possibility of release until completing the full term,
Maconochie introduced a "mark system." This system allowed convicts to earn
their freedom through hard work and good behaviour, using earned marks to get
goods or reduce their sentence. Prisoners had to progress through various stages,
starting with strict imprisonment, moving to conditional release, and ultimately
attaining final freedom based on accumulated marks. As a result, Alexander
Moconochie is indeed regarded as the “father of parole”.25
During the same period, Walter Crofton after becoming the administrator
of the Irish Prison System in 1854 implemented a program in Ireland called the
"Irish System," which utilized "tickets of leave”. This approach allowed inmates
25
Supra 8
20
to earn credits for early release, but their release from custody was conditional.
Those granted a "ticket of leave" were supervised in the community by either law
enforcement or civilians who were required to secure employment and conduct
home visits. These supervisors are similar to today's parole officers.
Zebulon Brockway, a Michigan penologist, is often acknowledged for

introducing indeterminate sentences and parole release in the United States.
Similar to Maconochie and Crofton, Brockway believed that inmates should have
the chance to earn their way out of prison based on good behaviour, resulting in
variable sentence lengths. He saw two benefits to this approach: it would serve
as a release mechanism for managing prison populations and contribute to the
rehabilitation of offenders by linking release to demonstrated good behaviour.
Brockway implemented this concept in 1876 as the superintendent of Elmira
Reformatory for young offenders in New York. Inmates at Elmira were assessed
on their behaviour, achievements, and education, and parole was granted based
on their performance in the reformatory.
Meanwhile, the reformative pattern which was attaining strength in the

world also influenced India to adopt restorative techniques for the treatment of
criminals. The recognition that confining convicts in prison served very little
purpose. As a result, significant changes were witnessed in jail organizations in
India during the late twentieth century.
2.4. Jurisprudence of Parole
Parole has its origins in the positivist school of criminology. In the history
of primitive societies and the early medieval period, religious and superstitious
beliefs heavily influenced human intellect and such beliefs dominated legal
systems, leading to punishments that were often arbitrary and irrational without
considering the mental aspects or circumstances of a crime. As society evolved,
social reformers aimed to create a fairer criminal justice system by understanding
the causation of crime and mental aspects of the criminal. This shift in thinking
gave rise to criminology as a distinct branch of knowledge with various schools
of thought.
21
The classical school of criminology believes that people are free to choose
their conduct. while committing any crime, an offender always calculates his
gain, his pleasure at the cost of other’s pain. So, he must be punished based on
the utilitarian principle i.e., the greater happiness of the greater number of people
in the society. maximum pleasure to be enjoyed and minimum pain to be suffered
by the people. 26this school focus on crime rather than the criminal.
The positivist school of criminology was the beginning of a new era that
focused on the criminal and the various reasons leading to the causation of crime.
This school of criminology argues that based on different circumstances an
individual is forced to commit a crime. So, he must get an opportunity to be
rehabilitated.27
As a result, the reformative theory of punishment came into being. This

theory is based on the humanistic principle that even if an offender commits a
crime, he does not cease to be a human being. The reformative theory seeks to
bring about a positive change in the attitude of the offender to rehabilitate him as
a law-abiding member of society. Thus, punishment is used as a measure to
reclaim the offender and not to torture him. It suggests that instead of prisoners
being allowed to idle in jail, they should be properly taught, educated and trained
to adjust themselves to normal life in the community after their release from the
penal institution. This purpose may be achieved through parole which has been
accepted as a modern technique for reformatting offenders all around the world.28
26
Gillin, J.L., 6TH edition, Criminology and Penology, USA, Praeger Publishers Inc, (1971) 339
27
Supra 6
28
Paranjape, N.V.,8th edition, Studies in Jurisprudence and Legal Theory, Allahabad: Central Law Publications,
(2016) 264-265
22
CHAPTER-III
LEGAL FRAMEWORK
3.1. Parole in India
In India, the prison reforms emerged as an outcome of the worst conditions

of treatment faced by the inmates in prisons during the period of their
imprisonment. With the match of time and with the dynamic nature of society,
the reformative trend was gaining momentum in the field of penology all around
the world and it paved the way for correctional methods of treatment of offenders
in India.29 As a result, India made several legislative provisions to adopt
correctional measures like parole, furlough, probation, etc.
In India, there is no uniform law regarding the grant of parole. The grant
of parole is largely governed by the rules made under two significant acts. The
two acts are The Prison’s Act, of 1894 and The Prisons Act, of 1900. The Prison’s
Act, of 1894 was enacted to streamline prison administration and put it on a
general uniform footing throughout the country. Further to consolidate the
several acts relating to prisoners confined by order of a court30 The Prisoner’s
Act 1900 was enacted. However, these two acts mainly focus on keeping the
criminals in custody and enforcing discipline and order in prisons31 and do so not
cover the grant of parole.
As per the provisions of the Constitution of India, ‘prisons’ is a 'State'

subject. The responsibility of prison management and prisoner administration
solely vests with State Governments who alone are competent to make
appropriate legislative provisions in this regard. Therefore, in India, each state
has its own parole rules which differ from state to state. This authority to make
rules is derived from section 59 of The Prison Act, of 1894.
The present ‘Prisons Act, of 1894’ is a pre-independence era Act and is

almost 130 years old. The Act mainly focuses on keeping criminals in custody
29
Medhi, Nayana & Dr. Sinha, A.K. “Parole-The Reformative Instrument of Punishment in Prisonization”: The
Legal Frontier: Research Journal of USLR, USTM, 2016, Vol I Issue I, 110-123
30
Bare Act of the Prisoner’s Act, 1900
31
PIB Government of India press release 2023
23
and enforcement of discipline and order in prisons. There is no provision for

reform and rehabilitation of prisoners in the existing Act. The Supreme Court in
Ramamurthy Vs. The State of Karnataka32 (1996) brought to the fore an urgent
need for uniformity in laws relating to prisons and has directed the Central and
State Governments to formulate a new Model Prison Manual. Earlier, the All-
India Committee on Jail Reforms (1980-83) had also emphasized the need for a
consolidated law on prisons33. As a result, the Model Prion Manual 2003 was
created by the Bureau of Police Research and Development. however, with time
and after gaining a better understanding of ground realities, a need was felt to
revise and update the manual to reflect developments of the past decade or so 34
the new Model Prison Manual 2016 was created.
In recent years i.e. 2023 in a press release by the press information bureau
of the government of India, it was stated that ‘The Prisons Act, 1894’, ‘The
Prisoners Act, 1900’ and ‘The Transfer of Prisoners Act, 1950’ will be replaced
by ‘Model Prison Act, 2023’. relevant provisions of said Acts have been
consolidated in the ‘Model Prisons Act, 2023’. Model Prisons Act, 2023 aims at
reforming prison management and ensuring the transformation of inmates into
law-abiding citizens and their rehabilitation in society.
3.2. Legal Framework of Parole in Indian Law
In India, The Model Prison Manual functions as a guiding framework for

the reforming of state jail manuals and rules. This manual outlines the important
elements necessary for developing the prison system in the country, with a focus
on being an effective tool for the reform and rehabilitation of prisoners.
Recognizing that prison reforms are an ongoing process; the model aims to
provide a framework for reforms concerning the treatment of prisoners of all
categories and striving for improved living and working conditions for prison
personnel.
32
(1997) 2 SCC 642
33
Model Prison Manual 2003, India, available at:
https://www.mha.gov.in/en/divisionofmha/Women_Safety_Division/prison-reforms
34
Model Prison Manual 2016, India, available at:
https://www.mha.gov.in/en/divisionofmha/Women_Safety_Division/prison-reforms
24
As stated in the Model Prison Manual (2016) parole given to inmates is a

progressive measure of correctional services. release of a prisoner on parole not
only saves him from the detrimental effects of imprisonment but also facilitates
him to maintain social connections with family and the community. This also
contributes to maintaining and developing a sense of self-confidence. Continued
contact with family and the community fosters a sense of optimism for the future.
Granting parole as an incentive motivates prisoners to maintain good behaviour
and remain disciplined in prison. The provisions relating to parole should be
liberalized to help a prisoner maintain a positive relationship with his family and
society while exhibiting good behaviour during his imprisonment. However, this
facility should only be allowed to selective prisoners based on well-defined
eligibility criteria and appropriateness.
According to the Model Prison Act parole means “temporary release of a

prisoner for a short period so that he may maintain social relations with his family
and the community to fulfil his familial and social obligations and
responsibilities. It is an opportunity for a prisoner to maintain regular contact
with the outside world so that he may keep himself updated with the latest
developments in society. It is however clear that the period spent by a prisoner
outside the Jail while on parole in no way is a concession so far as his sentence
is concerned. The prisoner has to spend extra time in prison for the period spent
by him outside the jail on parole.”
3.2.1. Types of Parole in India35
In India parole is of two types, depending upon its purpose-
i) Emergency parole under police protection: this parole is given to

prisoners in emergencies such as death/ serious illness/ marriage of
a family member or other close relative to cater for the family and
social responsibilities.
ii) Regular parole: this parole is given to the prisoners to take care of
35
Model Prison Manual 2016, para 19.03
25
the family and social obligations and responsibilities of a regular

nature as well as for the psychological needs of the prisoner to
maintain contact with the outside world like house repair,
admission of children to school or college, delivery of wife, sowing
and harvesting of crops, etc.
The majority of Indian states provide for both emergency and regular
parole. In some states, the term custody parole is used instead of emergency
parole. the prisoner in custody parole is escorted by police officers to the required
location.
3.2.2. Important Guidelines Regarding Parole
Some of the important guidelines mentioned regarding parole in the

Model Prison Manual (2016) are:
Eligibility for parole36
According to paragraph 19.06, convicts are entitled to emergency parole or

regular parole, provided they meet the eligibility criteria and adhere to the
conditions specified by the state government under any local and special laws or
instructions etc. undertrial prisoners are not eligible for regular parole but they
can be released on emergency parole only by the order of trial court. Parole is
not an absolute right, though it is a legal right available to eligible prisoners
subject to some conditions laid down by the authority which is subject to
cancellation in case of any violation.
Prisoners Disqualified for Regular Parole 37
the following categories of prisoners may not be eligible for release on parole:
1. prisoners whose immediate presence in society may be considered dangerous

or otherwise prejudicial to public peace and order by the District Magistrate
36
37
26
and Superintendent of Police,
2. prisoners who are considered dangerous or have been involved in serious

prison violence like assault, outbreak of riot, mutiny or escape, or who are
instigating serious violation of prison discipline as per the reports in his/her
annual good conduct report,
3. prisoners convicted for heinous offences such as dacoity, terrorist crimes,

kidnapping for ransom, and smuggling of commercial quantities of narcotic
and psychotropic substances and, in the opinion of the District Magistrate/
District Superintendent of Police, some such prisoners may not report back to
the prison after the completion of the parole period,
4. convicted foreigners,
5. prisoners committed for failure to give security for maintaining peace or good
behaviour,
6. prisoners suffering from mental illness, if not certified by the Medical Officer
to have recovered
7. prisoners whose work and conduct have not been good during the preceding
12 months.
If a prisoner falls under any of the categories written above, he will be

disqualified from getting regular parole.
Appropriate authority to sanction parole 38
The appropriate authority that can grant parole is mentioned in para 19.12 and
19.13 of the Model Prison Manual. According to para 19.12, the head of the
Prisons Department or any other competent authority as specified by any relevant
law or instructions on the subject should be the competent authority who can
grant regular parole to convict prisoners. according to para 19.13, the
Superintendent of Prisons should be the competent authority who can grant
emergency parole to convict prisoners under police protection. In the case of
38
Model Prison Manual 2016, para 19.12 and 19.13
27
under trial prisoner, the competent authority shall be the trial court. However, the
competent authority who can grant parole differs from state to state.
Procedure for granting parole39
Prisoners who want to be released on parole will have to submit their application
in a prescribed form to the Superintendent of the Prison. then the superintendent
will carefully examine each case regarding eligibility for parole with particular
reference to conduct, work, attitude towards family and community, and how the
previous period leave was utilized, if any. After examination, he will forward the
application within 3 days of receipt of the application from the prisoner along
with his recommendation to the competent authority to sanction parole. The
competent authority will forward the application received within 3 days of such
receipt along with the recommendation of the Superintendent of Prison to the
Superintendent of Police for his report through the District Magistrate of the
concerned district. The Superintendent of Police has to send his report through
the District Magistrate within 14 days from the date of receipt from the competent
authority. The district magistrate within 3 days has the forward such report to the
competent authorities. If in case the police disagree with the proposed release,
reasons for such disagreement should be specified. The competent authority has
to decide on the application within 7 days from the date of receipt of the report
of the district magistrate.
Conditions40
The competent authority who is authorized to sanction parole may make an order
for the release of a prisoner subject to the following conditions:
1. The prisoner needs to furnish cash security determined by the competent

authority and execute either a personal recognizance bond or a bond with
one or more sureties, as directed by the competent authority,
2. The prisoner must stay at the place assigned by the competent authority
and is not allowed to go beyond the specified limits,
39
Model Prison Manual 2016, para 19.14 and 19.15
40
28
3. The prisoner must maintain good behaviour and must refrain from
committing any offences during the period of release,
4. The prisoner must regularly report to the probation officer in the area
where they are staying during the release period,
5. The prisoner must avoid associating with bad characters and refrain from
leading an irresponsible lifestyle,
6. The prisoner will be liable to be sent back to prison right away if any of
the conditions are violated.
7. The prisoner must return to the prison superintendent at the end of the
granted release period or if recalled.
3.3. Judicial Prospective on Prole
In the absence of any specific provision in the CrPC regarding parole;

judgments of the Hon’ble Supreme Court, various High Courts as well as the
rules framed in various States, regulating the grant of parole have led to the
development of the parole system in India. Parole has now become an integral
part of the Criminal Justice System in India.41 The Indian courts have generally
favoured the view that convicts and undertrial prisoners who have been
incarcerated for a long time, should be released on parole to maintain unity of
family, it could be useful to cite some of the decisions to support this argument.
Supreme Court in the case of Krishan Lal v. State of Delhi42 observed

that “Penological innovation in the shape of parole is claimed to be a success in
rehabilitation and checking recidivism”
In Hiralal Mallick v. State of Bihar in this particular case, the appellant

was convicted under Section 326 of Indian Penal Code for causing grievous hurt
and was sentenced to eight years prison of imprisonment. At the time of the
commission of the offence, the convict was only 12 years of age. The High Court
41
Supra 1
42
AIR 1977 SC 2236
29
later reduced the sentence to four years, taking into consideration the young age
of the accused. The Supreme Court ordered the appellant's release on parole for
reasonable periods to maintain family connections and prevent isolation, which
could lead to dehumanization. However, the Apex Court emphasized that parole
should be granted subject to sufficient safeguards ensuring prisoner's appropriate
behaviour outside the prison and prompt return upon completion of the parole
term.
In Babulal Das vs The State of West Bengal, 43 Hon’ble Justice Krishna

Iyer of the SC believes it's fair to give individuals who have been imprisoned
without trial a chance to reform through the parole power given under Section 15
of the Maintenance of Internal Security Act 1971. Allowing calculated risk, such
as parole, might contribute to social gain if such jurisdiction is exercised wisely.
In Samir Chatterjee v. State of West Bengal 44, The Supreme Court

overturned the Calcutta High Court's decision to grant parole to an individual
detained under Section 3(1) of MISA. Additionally, the court rejected the notion
that long-term preventive detention can be self-defeating and criminally counter-
productive.
In Gurdeep Bagga vs Delhi, Administration 45 Supreme Court

recommended Delhi Administration establish rules or guidelines for granting
parole to life convicts or those serving long-term imprisonment. We propose that
life convicts who have undergone imprisonment for more than 4 or 5 years and
have maintained good conduct during their sentence be allowed a one-month
vacation from jail each year. This could positively impact their mental and
emotional well-being, and it may help in reducing offences within the prison.
Additionally, it would provide a brief period for convicts to experience normal
family life and maintain family unity during the holiday.
In Kesar Singh v. state of Himachal Pradesh,46 the High Court stated that
the exercise of the power of releasing a prisoner on parole or furlough must not,
43
AIR 1975 SC 606
44
AIR 1975 SC 1165.
45
32 (1987) DLT 52 a
46
1985 Crilj 1202-1205
30
therefore, be looked upon as an act of charity, compassion or clemency but as an

act in the discharge of a legal duty required to be performed upon the fulfilment
of the prescribed conditions to effectuate a salutary purpose. The discretion must,
therefore, be exercised in a just and reasonable manner and conformity with the
apparent purpose of the enactment and it must avoid leading to some
inconvenience, absurdity, hardship or injustice which must be presumed not to
have been intended by the statute.
The Supreme Court in Dharambir v. State of Uttar Pradesh47, was asked to

decide if long-term prisoners should be allowed parole regularly to prevent
complete isolation from society. In the present case, the appellant was sentenced
to life imprisonment for murder without the possibility of sentence reduction.
The court has emphasized the need for parole even in the case of heinous crimes.
It directed state governments and prison authorities to grant a two-week parole
each year to such prisoners, provided they behaved well during the parole period.
In the case of Sunit Fulchand Shah v. UOI48, The Supreme Court stated
that a temporary release of a detained person does not change their legal status,
as their complete freedom and liberty are not fully restored. Therefore, the apex
court emphasized that the time spent on temporary release through parole should
not be deducted from the maximum imprisonment period.
In Gudikanti Narasimhulu and Ors. v. Public Prosecutor49, Justice

Krishna Iyer remarked “It is not out of place to mention that if the State takes up
a flexible attitude it may be possible to permit long spells of parole, under
controlled conditions, so that fear that the full freedom if bailed out, might be
abused may be eliminated by this experimental measure, punctuated by reversion
to prison. Unremitting insulation in the harsh and hardened company of prisoners
leads to many unmentionable vices that humanizing interludes of parole are part
of the compassionate constitutionalism of our system”.
47
1979 AIR 1595
48
1988 Crl 248
49
AIR 1978 SC429
31
In Ramesh Kumar v. State of Rajasthan & Ors50, the Hon’ble High Court
is of the opinion that the powers of the State Government under the Parole Rules
cannot be exercised so long as an appeal by a convicted person is pending and
the appellate court is in seizin of the case. The Parole Rules cannot stultify or
thwart the judicial process and even in the most emergent circumstances the
courts will be open to granting relief to a convict in deserving cases
In Veerumchanni Raghvendra Rao v. State of Andhra Pradesh,51 the

Supreme Court ruled that release on parole and suspension of sentence during
pendency of appeal in Supreme Court is liable to be struck down being vires the
statutory powers of State Government. The Andhra Pradesh Parole Rules, 1981
(Rule 23), and Andhra Pradesh Prison Rules, 1979 [Rule 974 (2)] were struck
down in this , case being inconsistent with Section 432(5) read with Section 389
of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.
In appeal against the judgment of the High Court, the Supreme Court
referred to its earlier ruling in the case of Arvind Yadav v. Ramesh Kumar and
others,52 and held that, "the convicts have no indefeasible right to be released.
The Probation888 Board and the State Government are required to take into
consideration the relevant factors before deciding or declining the release and the
facts of individual case are to be taken into consideration for deciding the issue
of release." In Arvind Yadav's case the accused Ramesh Kumar was accused in
14 cases filed under various sections of IPC and the manner of committing
murder was gruesome and brutal and therefore, he was rightly denied release on
probation.3 The rules provide for a detailed procedure for consideration of
application for release of prisoners on probation.3 Once rejected, an application
for release can be filed again after two years. The Board consists of Home
Secretary of the State, I.G. Prisons or Deputy I.G. and another member.
Therefore, there was no infirmity in the rejection of respondent's application for
release in the instant case and appeal was dismissed.
50
2013 CREF 01
51
1985 Crijl 1009 (SC)
52
AIR 2003 SCW 2550.
32
CHAPTER- IV
CRITICAL ISSUES IN PAROLE
The parole system is an integral part of the criminal justice system. It

allows prisoners to be released from prison before serving their full sentences,
under certain conditions and supervision. While parole facilitates the
reformation and reintegration of individuals into society and reduces prison
overcrowding. However, the effectiveness of the parole system in India faces
various practical issues. Below are some critical issues related to the parole
system.
4.1. Misuse of Parole
Parole, initially aimed at implementing rehabilitation and reformative

measures in the correctional process, has witnessed a notable shift in recent
times. The concept is now being exploited by the rich and influential class as
a means to escape imprisonment. Some of the famous cases of misuse of
parole are:
Siddharth Vashisht aka Manu Sharma, was convicted in 2006 to

serving life imprisonment for the murder of Jessica Lal. Sharma is the son of
the former Indian National Congress leader. On 24 September 2009, he was
granted 30-day parole by the Delhi government. the parole orders were
granted by the Lieutenant Governor on the grounds that Sharma needed to
perform rituals related to the death of his grandmother, attend to his ailing
mother and look after the family business which was suffering in his
absence.53 On 10 November 2009, he returned to Tihar jail before the expiry
of his parole following mounting criticism that he violated parole norms.
Manu Sharma was reportedly spotted in a nightclub in a hotel while his
mother was seen addressing a press conference in Chandigarh. 54 Delhi
53
Manu Sharma out on 30-day parole, The Times of India, New Delhi, 25 September 2009,
https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/delhi/manu-sharma-out-on-30-day-parole/articleshow/5052879.cms
54
Jessica Lall murder: Manu Sharma's parole party ends, returns to Tihar, The Times of India, New Delhi, 10
November 2009, https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/delhi/jessica-lall-murder-manu-sharmas-parole-party-
33
government asked police to probe if Manu violated parole norms, Chandigarh

police found every reason cited by Manu in his parole to be either wrong or
unjustified.55
Another famous case regarding the misuse of parole is Bibi Jagir

Kaur’s case who was former Punjab cabinet minister. She was convicted in
March of various criminal charges related to her teen daughter's death in
2000. eventually, she was sentenced to 5 years of rigorous imprisonment for
her role in the death of her daughter. Just After spending four months in jail,
she was granted parole and allegedly received special treatment in jail ever
since she was convicted.56
In the case of Dera Sacha Sauda Chief Gurmeet Rahim Ram Rahim
who is convicted of two rapes and the murder of journalist Ram Chander
Chhatrapati was released on parole. Delhi Commission for Women chief
Swati Maliwal wrote a letter to Prime Minister Narendra Modi, seeking
changes in remission and parole rules in context with the parole given to rape
convict Gurmeet Ram Rahim Singh and the release of the rapists of Bilkis
Bano. She wrote, “It has been observed that the convict has been released
multiple times during his incarceration. This time, when out on parole, he has
held several 'Pravachan Sabhas and released music videos promoting himself.
In fact, recently several senior functionaries of the Haryana and Himachal
Pradesh Governments including the Deputy Speaker and Mayor (Haryana)
and Transport Minister (Himachal Pradesh) attended his 'Pravachan Sabhas'
and pledged their complete allegiance and support to him. These incidents
are deeply disturbing and reflect the "connivance of highly placed politicians
with influential convicts. The politicians continue to use rapists to further
their vote bank politics, especially when elections are round the comer, which
ends-returns-to-tihar/articleshow/5214895.cms
55
Chandigarh cops justify their report, The Times of India, New Delhi, 12 November 2009,
https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/delhi/chandigarh-cops-justify-their-report/articleshow/5221137.cms
56
After four months in jail, former Punjab minister Jagir Kaur given parole, NDTV, 08 august 2012,
https://www.ndtv.com/india-news/after-four-months-in-jail-former-punjab-minister-jagir-kaur-given-parole-
496084
34
happens to be the case in both Gujarat and Haryana. If influential people

enjoying political clout can seek undue benefits while serving life sentences
in heinous crimes against women and children, justice is clearly denied and
any steps of the Government for ensuring the safety of women and children
are rendered devoid of any merit.”57
Furthermore, it provides an opportunity to commit crimes or abscond

from prison, according to the NCRB report of the last 5 years (Table 1) total
of 1,44,118 prisoners were released on parole out of which 3,248 prisoners
absconded and only 1,430 prisoners were rearrested which is 32% of number
of prisoners absconded. This depicts the capacity of authorities to monitor
parolees while on parole and their inability to rearrest the absconded prisoner.
Year No. of No. of No. of No. of

undertrials prisoners prisoners absconded
released released absconded prisoners
on parole rearrested
2018 15,35,871 31,297 343 150

2019 15,98,218 26,390 205 127
2020 12,91,504 32,122 1342 392
2021 14,68,627 28,763 860 523
2022 15,48,142 25,546 498 238
total 74,42,362 1,44,118 3,248 1,430
Table.1
NCRB REPORT ON PRISON STATISTICS INDIA 2018-2022
In Saibanna v. State of Karnataka58 and Krishan v. State of

Haryana case, the convict committed murder second time while he was
57
DCW Chief writes to PM Modi, seeking changes in remission, parole rules, Business Standard, New Delhi,
29 October 2022, https://www.business-standard.com/article/current-affairs/dcw-chief-writes-to-pm-modi-
seeking-changes-in-remission-parole-rules-122102900546_1.html
58
(2005) JT 5 S.C. 567
35
released on parole.
In Bidya Bhusan Mohanty v. State of Orissa and Anr. 59 the convict,

who happens to be the son of the Director General of Police in Orissa, was
convicted of raping a German national and was sentenced to a seven-year
rigorous imprisonment sentence along with a fine. In November 2006, he was
granted a fifteen-day parole to visit his sick mother, during which his father
acted as a surety. However, he subsequently absconded, and his father
claimed to be unaware of his whereabouts. After a considerable seven-year
period, the police arrested him in March 2013 in Kerala following a tip-off.
By then, he had assumed a new identity and refused to acknowledge himself
as Biti Mohanty. His father also supported this denial of his son's identity.
From the above cases, it is quite clear that rich and influential people
misuse parole for their convenience. This not only poses a danger to society
but is also unjust for poor inmates who couldn’t even get parole for genuine
reasons. Additionally, it reveals a lapse in the way prisons are run and the
capacity of authorities, resulting in unfortunate events in our society, which
also become the reason parolees abscond while released on parole. Therefore,
this has become a significant issue that needs urgent attention.
4.2. Refusal Of Parole
According to regulatory guidelines, rules have been legislated in

different states regarding grand of parole. As stated by the court in
Maharashtra and Another v. Suresh Pandurang Darvekar. 60 parole is
essentially an executive function. for the grant of parole, a convict has, to move
to the state government or the prison authorities. However, in most cases, the
executive without applying his mind and without appreciating facts refuses the
chance of parole to the convict. The police reports are also prepared without
considering ground realities indicating a threat to law and order breach of
59
(20070 CriLJ 2187
60
AIR 2006 SC 247
36
peace, or public tranquillity which later become the grounds for refusal of
parole.
If we take a glance at the prison statistics report of the past 5 years i.e.,
2018-2022 provided by NCRB (Table.1). It is revealed that a total of 74,42,362
undertrials were released during these 5 years out of which 1,44,118 prisons
were released on parole which is 1.93% of the total prisoners released. Which
is very low compared to the total number of prisoners released during this
period. Though the release of prisoners depends on various factors, it is
important to emphasize that the provision of parole is not being utilized to the
full extent.
In Smt. Sharda Jain vs State61 case the Hon’ble High Court held that
the grant of Parole is essentially an executive function, it is for the Government
to consider the request made by the convict for the purpose and to pass an
appropriate order on it. If, however, the order passed by the Government,
declining parole is based upon irrelevant ground or extraneous considerations
or is otherwise wholly unsustainable being an order which no reasonable
person could, in the facts and circumstances of the case have passed or is totally
perverse or arbitrary, it is open to the Court, in the exercise of its powers
under Article 226 of the Constitution to set aside such an order and direct
release of the convict on parole.
In Sunil Fulchand Shah v. UOI62 case, the Constitutional bench of the

Supreme Court has held that “the bar of judicial intervention to direct
temporary release of a detenue would not, however, affect the jurisdiction of
the High Court’s under Article 226 of the Constitution or of this Court under
Article 32, 136 or 142 of the Constitution to direct the temporary release of the
detenue, where the request of the detenue to be released on parole for a
specified reason and/or for a specified period, has been, in the opinion of the
Court, unjustifiably refused or where in the interest of justice such an order of
61
(2010) 167 DLT 655
62
(2000) 1 SCR 945
37
temporary release is required to be made. That jurisdiction, however, has to be

sparingly exercised by the Court and even when it is exercised, it is appropriate
that the Court leave it to the administrative or jail authorities to prescribe the
conditions and terms on which parole is to be availed of by the detenue.
In Somesh Gupta vs State of The NCT Of Delhi 63, the Delhi High
Court laid down criteria for refusal of parole in serious offences and stated that
the request for grant of parole is to file SLP before the Hon'ble Supreme Court
against conviction and sentence for a serious offence certainly stands on a
stronger footing than the desire to maintain links with the society and to reunite
with the family. Hence, ordinarily, such requests ought to be allowed unless
there are reasonable grounds which warrant taking a different view in a
particular case. Such grounds may include:
i) A reasonable apprehension, based upon material available with

the Government such as the circumstances in which the offence
is alleged to have been committed by him and the other cases if
any in which he is involved, that the petitioner, if released on bail
may not return to jail to undergo the remaining portion of the
sentence awarded to him;
ii) A serious apprehension of breach of law and order or commission

of another offence by the petitioner if he comes out on parole;
iii) Past conduct of the petitioner such as jumping the bail or parole
granted earlier to him;
iv) A reasonable possibility of the petitioner trying to intimidate or

harm those who have deposed against him or their relatives.
It is neither possible nor desirable to exhaustively lay down all such grounds
as would justify the denial of parole in a particular case. Each case has to be
63
(2010) 1 Crimes 864
38
examined by the Government dispassionately and with an open mind, taking

into consideration all relevant facts and circumstances.
4.3. Other Issues in Parole
1. Lack of uniformity in parole policies: in India, there is a Lack of

uniformity in parole policies and practices among states because each
state has its own set of rules on the concept of parole which contributes to
disparities in decision-making processes and eligibility criteria. Such
inconsistency compromises the fairness and transparency of the overall
parole system.
2. Insufficient resources and inadequate manpower: In India, there are

insufficient resources and inadequate manpower. according to data on
police organizations compiled by the Bureau of Police Research and
Development (BPR&D), the ratio for the whole country as of January 1,
2022, of police personnel per lakh persons is 196.23 as per sanctioned
strength and 152.80 as per actual strength.64 Better monitoring and
supervision of parolees is necessary. Limited resources and inadequate
manpower can make it difficult to oversee released prisoners, increasing
the risk of parole violations or repeat offences.
3. Limited availability of rehabilitation and support services: Another

issue is the limited availability of rehabilitation and support services or
after-care services throughout the parole period. Released individuals
often face difficulties in obtaining access to essential educational, and
vocational training for creating employment opportunities, or mental
health programs necessary for their effective reintegration. This
constitutes one of the most important integral parts of correctional
programmes for prisoners, since immediately after release from prison an
offender has to confront a lot of social and personal problems, such as loss
64
Bihar, West Bengal have lowest police-public ratio: Centre, The Hindi, New Delhi, 28 March 2023,
https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/bihar-west-bengal-have-lowest-police-public-ratio-
centre/article66671385.ece
39
of family contacts, lack of suitable employment opportunities, and social

stigma of prison sentence.65
65
Ghost, Sabyasachi, “Probation and Parole as Methods of Mainstreaming Criminals: A Socio-Legal Analysis
from India Perspective”, Social Science Research Network, 2008
40
CHAPTER- V
CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTIONS
5.1. Suggestions
below are some suggestions given by researcher that may prove helpful
in tackling the issues in the parole system:
The primary and essential reform needed is enacting a well-defined law

on parole that will uniformly be applicable throughout the nation. Given the
widespread acceptance of the concept of parole throughout the globe, including
in India, the legislature must formulate comprehensive and objective
legislation that ensures uniformity. While the absence of such a law has not
completely halted the parole administration in India, codification is important
to eliminate ambiguity and arbitrariness in the justice system. A uniform law
would signify progress, and the regulation of parole should strictly adhere to
statutory norms and procedures. This will Ensure that any person's application
for parole is not frivolously or irresponsibly refused.
To curb the issue of misuse of parole specific dedicated authorities

should be formed to look over the grant of parole and manage its
administration. In Belgium a similar model is prevalent. In 2006, Belgium
restructured its system through legislation to address the need for a shift in the
decision-making power from the executive to the judicial. Multi-disciplinary
Sentence Implementation Courts (SIC) have been set up which ensure
transparency in the release and reformation of prisoners, these specialized
courts carry out a risk assessment regarding the conditional release of prisoners
to minimize threat to society while ascertaining social integration and liberty
of the prisoners.
If the grant of parole is grounded on various factors and subjects each

offender's request to be scrutinized by multiple authorities, the potential of
misuse can be significantly curtailed. Thus, Therefore, having multiple
authorities equipped with the necessary resources to carry out essential
assessments, background checks, and similar processes could serve as a means
41
to prevent the misuse of parole. proper utilization of parole can be achieved

through this which ensures that there will be no misuse of the concept of parole.
Parole officers play an important role in monitoring and assisting

individuals on parole. They monitor and offer guidance and support to the
parolee while reporting violations to the relevant authorities. However,
challenges such as inadequate staffing and limited resources can hinder the
ability to conduct regular check-ins, maintain consistent contact, and promptly
address beach of parole conditions or violations that may occur. Thus, it
becomes essential to enhance the parole supervision infrastructure to ensure
the effective reintegration of parolees and to minimize the potential risks they
may pose to society. Investing in training and capacity-building of parole
officers, coupled with the provision of ample resources, can elevate the
monitoring and supervision of individuals on parole. This includes utilizing
technological advancements like electronic monitoring systems to enhance the
tracking and supervision of parolees. Such measures can improve their
efficiency in monitoring, communicating, and meeting the requirements of
those on parole.
Immediately after release from prison, an offender faces various social

and personal problems, such as severed family ties, limited job opportunities,
and the social stigma associated with a prison record. To tackle this issue
emphasis should be given to expanding the availability and accessibility of
rehabilitation programs during the parole period. This can be achieved through
collaboration between prison authorities, NGOs, educational institutions, and
other stakeholders. Such collaboration can provide vocational training,
educational opportunities, mental health support, and other necessary services
to help parolees reintegrate into society successfully.
Also, various recommendations were made regarding parole by the

Second Administrative Reforms Commission in its fifth report which are:
1. If the victim wants to oppose the bail application of an accused,

he/she shall be allowed to be heard. Similarly, to release
prisoners on parole, a mechanism should be developed to
42
consider the views of the victims.
2. The Union and State Governments should work out, fund and
implement at the earliest, modernisation and reforms of the
Prison System as recommended by the All-India Committee on
Jail Reforms (1980-83).
3. To ensure impartiality and uniformity in decision-making, it is felt
that an Advisory Board to be chaired by a retired Judge of the High
Court with the State DGP and the IG (Prisons) as members should be
set up to make recommendations to the State Government on grant
of parole to convicts. The recommendations of the Board should
normally be accepted by the State Government. If the State
Government differs from the Board, it should express its difference of
opinion in writing and obtain fresh advice from the Board before
taking a final decision on the matter.66
5.2. Conclusion
India among all theories mainly focuses on the reformative theory of

punishment. Where the criminal is given a proper opportunity to reform and
rehabilitate. Individualistic and humane approaches are essential components
of reformative theory. This theory believes that various circumstances force an
individual to commit a crime, so he must get an opportunity for rehabilitation.
It advocates that we should hate the crime and not the criminal. Parole is a
means that facilitates that.
Parole is one of the most acceptable forms of correctional measure for

the reformation and rehabilitation of offenders. It serves as an important tool
in the criminal justice system for helping individuals reintegrate into society
after serving a portion of their sentence. parole has proven to reduce prison
overcrowding and reformation of prisoners. Parole strikes a balance between
punishment and rehabilitation, recognizing that people can change. This
66
Second Administrative Reforms Commission, 5th report, p 209-211, https://darpg.gov.in/arc-reports
43
benefits both individuals and the overall criminal justice system.
Originally the concept of parole was to reform prisoners so that they

could reintegrate into society after their final release and to treat prisoners
humanely in prison so that they do not go back into the criminal world.
However, in recent times it has been misused by rich and politically influential
people to escape prison who could end up being a potential threat to the
victims, there is no regard for the rights of the victim or the rights of the
accused. Moreover, in some instances, it has been used by the parolee to
commit a crime again. While the philosophy behind parole has been hailed and
the judiciary has called for a liberal use of parole, the subjective satisfaction of
the executive in granting parole has posed a major roadblock. Refusal of parole
based on irrelevant grounds, misuse of my people in power and position, lack
of uniformity on parole policies, lack of proper resources and inadequate
manpower, and limited availability of rehabilitation and support services had
devoid the concept of its underlying purpose and utility. The problem lies not
in the concept of parole but in how it is being implemented in India and used
by authorities and influential and rich people.
It is the need of time that we should bring new reforms so that deserving
prisoners can get parole and it cannot be misused. Various other issues that are
connected to parole such as after-release support services, supervision of
parolees, proper facilities and sufficient manpower need to be taken care of.
Only after tackling all these issues, an effective parole system can be
established in India which will properly justify the notion of parole.
44
BIBLIOGRAPHY
BOOKS
 Paranjape, N.V., Studies in jurisprudence and Legal Theory. (8th ed) Allahabad:
Central Law Agency (2016)
 Paranjape, N.V., Criminology & Penology with Victimology. (15th ed)

Allahabad: Central Law Agency (2011)
 Jain, Ashok K., Criminology Penology & Victimology. (2nd ed) Delhi: Ascent
Publication
REFERENCES
 Medhi, Nayana & Dr. Sinha, A.K. “Parole-The Reformative Instrument of

Punishment in Prisonization”: The Legal Frontier: Research Journal of USLR,
USTM, 2016, Vol I Issue I, 110-123
 Pooja, Gayatri. “Meaning and Concept of Parole and Probation in India”: Indian
Journal of Law and Legal Research, 2022, Vol IV Issue II, 766-781
 Castelino, Janice, “A Study on Rehabilitation of Offenders: Whether It

Works?”: International Journal of Creative Research Thoughts, 2021, Vol IX
Issue V
 Khari, Hans Honey & Sharma, Vijaylaxmi & Bhardwaj, Abhinav, “The
Effectiveness of Parole Mechanisms in India: Challenges and Solutions”:
European Chemical Bulletin, 2023, Vol XII Issue VI
 Bhattacharya, Oishik, “A Comparative Study of The Parole System: India and

the United Kingdom”: Indian Journal of Law and Legal Research, 2022, Vol IV
Issue VI
 Mishra, S. Saswati. “Revisiting The Concept of Parole System in India:

Critical Analysis”: NUJS Journal of Regulatory Studies, 2022, Vol VII
Issue III
 Ambika. “Parole as a Modus Operandi of Reformation and

Rehabilitation”: International Journal of Novel Research and
Development, 2023, Vol VIII Issue II, 981-1148
45
 Murthy, NSSR & Dr. Srinivas, MSV. “Indian Parole System - A Review of
Judicial Stand and Critical Issues”: International journal of innovative
research & development, 2015, Vol IV Issue IX, 301-304
 K., Sangeetha. “A Critical Analysis on Law Governing Parole in India”:

Scholars International Journal, Crime and Justice, 2019, Vol II Issue IX,
271-277
WEBLIOGRAPHY
 https://criminallawstudiesnluj.wordpress.com/2021/02/24/parole-in-india-
current-state-and-the-need-for-reforms-ii/
 https://www.livelaw.in/time-revamp-parole-system-india/?infinitescroll=1
 https://www.encyclopedia.com/law/legal-and-political-magazines/probation-
and-parole-history-goals-and-decision-making
 https://criminallaw.uslegal.com/probation-and-
parole/parole/history/#google_vignette
 https://law.jrank.org/pages/1817/Probation-Parole-History-Goals-Decision-
Making-Origins-probation-parole.html#google_vignette
 https://criminallawstudiesnluj.wordpress.com/2021/02/24/parole-in-india-
current-state-and-the-need-for-reforms-ii/
 https://ncrb.gov.in/prison-statistics-india.html
 https://www.mha.gov.in/en/divisionofmha/Women_Safety_Division/prison-
reforms

PAROLE AS A CORRECTIONAL MEASURE 1

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

PAROLE AS A CORRECTIONAL MEASURE 1

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

PAROLE AS A CORRECTIONAL MEASURE: A CRITICAL STUDY

SHIVANI RANA (ROLLNO.23217)

UNDER THE SUPERVISION OF

Roll No. 23217

Signature of Candidate Supervisor

I express my sincere gratitude to my Hon’ble Supervisor Dr. Pooja Sood, Associate

It is sincerely hoped that this research will be found to be useful by teachers,

1. AIR - All-India Reporter

2. BPR&D - Bureau of Police Research & Development

3. CRPC - Code of Criminal Procedure

4. CRL - Criminal Appeal

5. CREF - Civil Reference

6. CRILJ - Criminal Law General

7. DCW - Delhi Commission for Women

8. DLT - Delhi Law Times

10. HC - High Court

11. JT - Judgement Today

12. NCT - National Capital Territory

13. NCRB - National Crime Records Bureau

14. NDTV - New Delhi Television Limited

15. NGO - Non-Government Organization

16. NUJS - National University of Judicial Science

17. ORS - Others

18. PIB - Press Information Bureau

19. SC - Supreme Court

20. SCC - Supreme Court Cases

21. SIC - Sentence Implementation Courts

22. SLP - Special Leave Petition

23. UOI - Union of India

24. USLR - University School of Law and Research

2. Maharashtra and Another v. Suresh Pandurang Darvekar. AIR 2006 SC 247

3. Smt. Poonam Lata v. Wadhaman & others AIR 1987 SC 1383

4. Ashfaq v. The state of Rajasthan (2017) 15 SCC 55

5. Asha ram v. State of Rajasthan CRWP 613/2023

7. Mohd Sabir v. State of Punjab CRWP 10719/2020

8. Ramamurthy v. The State of Karnataka (1997) 2 SCC 642

9. Krishna Lal v. State of Delhi AIR 1976 SC 1139

10. Hiralal Mallick v. State of Bihar (1977) AIR 2236

12. Samir Chatterjee v. State of West Bengal AIR 1975 SC 1165

13. Gurdeep Bagga v. Delhi, Administration 32 (1987) DLT 57 a

14. Kesar Singh v. State of Himachal Pradesh 1985 CriLJ 1202-1205

15. Dharambir v. State of Uttar Pradesh 1979 AIR 1595

16. Sunil filchand Shah v. UOI 1988 Crl 248

18. Ramesh Kuman v. State of Rajasthan & Ors 2013 CREF 01

21. Saibanna v. State of Karnataka (2005) JT 5 S.C. 567

22. Krishan v. State of Haryana (1997) CriLJ 3180

24. Smt. Sharda Jain v. State (2010) 167 DLT 655

25. Sunil Fulchand Shah v. UOI (2000) 1 SCR 945

The concept of crime is essentially concerned with social order. Man’s

This imposes a responsibility on the state to maintain social order by

To punish criminals is a recognised function of all civilised States. Normally state

For the reformation and rehabilitation of offenders’ various correctional tools

These objects are:

Parole is recommended as the best measure to reclaim offenders to society as

1.1. Significance of the study

Exploration of parole as a corrective measure is of utmost importance given its

Moreover, it is important to recognize the possibility of parole law being

The existing Prison Act and regulations lack adequacy in providing

1.2. Review of Literature

Dr. K. Sangeetha in her paper “A Critical Analysis on Law Governing Parole

In an article titled "Revisiting the Concept of Parole System in India: Critical

In Research titled “Parole as a Modus Operandi of Reformation and

individualistic and humane approach as the cornerstone of rehabilitation. The

In a research paper, “Parole-The Reformative Instrument of Punishment in