Mumbai: The Bombay High Court has granted parole to a man to bid farewell to his son, who is going to Australia for further studies, observing that if parole can be granted to share grief, it can also be for a “happy occasion”. The court noted that convicts are allowed conditional release for a brief time to let them be in touch with the outside world and to arrange for their family affairs as though behind bars, the convict continues to be someone’s son, husband, father or brother.
The HC was hearing a petition filed by Vivek Shrivastav, who was convicted in a 2012 murder case, seeking parole to arrange the tuition fees and other expenses for his son’s education at an Australian university and to also bid farewell to him.
His plea said his son has been selected for a course in Australia for which tuition fees of Rs 36 lakh have to be deposited along with travelling and stay expenses. He sought release on parole for a month to arrange the money and help out his family.
Shrivastav was sentenced to life in prison by a sessions court at Dadra and Nagar Haveli, Silvassa, in 2018. His appeal against the sentence is pending before the HC.
The prosecution opposed the plea claiming that parole is normally given in emergency situations. Arranging money for education and bidding farewell to son are not grounds on which parole should be given.
A bench of Justices Bharati Dangre and Manjusha Deshpande said it failed to understand this reasoning of the prosecution. The judges remarked that the provisions of parole and furlough have been time and again looked towards as a “humanistic approach” towards the convicts.
“Grief is an emotion, so is happiness and if parole can be granted to share grief, why not to share a happy occasion or moment,” the judges asked. The court said it fails to understand if parole can be granted to celebrate marriage, then why the benefit of the rule cannot be extended to the petitioner in the present case who needs it to arrange tuition fees for his son’s foreign education and to bid him farewell.
The court granted Shrivastav parole for ten days noting the aim and objective of the rules formulated to release a convict either on parole or on furlough was to enable the inmate to maintain continuity with his family life and deal with family matters.
“...and also to save him from the evil effects of continuous prison life and maintain his mental balance by creating active interest in life and to enable him to remain hopeful for the future,” the judges underlined.
“We miserably fail to understand why the benefit of parole should be denied to the petitioner on a happy occasion like this, where the petitioner is seeking temporary relief so that he can arrange for financial resources and bid farewell to his son, who has secured an admission in a prestigious university in Australia,” the bench added.
It added that a huge amount has to be arranged for the petitioner’s son to go to Australia. “Unless and until the father is available to arrange for this amount, his young son may lose a chance and the offer which he has received,” the court said.
