Parole: Political Connections & A Getaway from Crime?

Prachiti Suresh Shinde, studies in TYBLS at Thakur Ramnarayan College of Law. She believes that every aspect of life could be made creative just with your art of writing.

INTRODUCTION

The word parole is derived from the French phrase “je donne ma parole”, which means “I give my word,” and its dictionary definition is “word of honor”[i] The main aim of parole is to monitor the actions of convicts, directing them as well as helping them in certain situations. It is required that there should be strict monitoring during their release on parole.

HISTORY

The origin of the concept of parole is in military law. In the early history, an interim release was given to the POW so that they could meet their family members and they were supposed to return when the specified period ends. Parole has become an important component in the Indian Criminal Justice System allowing the jailbird to engage in society. The parole is provided only if the inmate has already served a segment of his/her sentence.

There were two schools of thought i.e., positivist and classical, arguing about whether prisoners should be given some leverage. The classical school stated that people are free to determine their actions. So, when a crime is committed the offender always calculates its profit, and pleasure at the price of others’ agony. Hence, he must be punished. While the positivist asserted that the circumstance could force someone to commit a crime so he must be given a chance to redeem himself. From here the concept of parole arose. As we in India always believe in the reformative theory of punishment, the dual objective of parole is to make the inmate a law-abiding citizen as well as to make sure that he does re-offend and walk through the path of crime again.

TYPES OF PAROLE

There are two types of paroles provided:

a) Custody/ emergency parole:

Time limit: 14 days

Who can get: All convicts except for foreigners and convicts serving death sentences.

Reason: the death of a family member (which includes grandparents, father, mother, spouse, son, daughter, brother, sister) and the marriage of a family member (which includes son, daughter, brother, sister)

Who grants permission: The Superintendent of jail (after verifying the situation)

Parole condition: It is dependent upon the nature of the offense as well as the behavior of the inmate during his stay. He can either be escorted by the police officer or he shall report daily to the local police station. He cannot be released for one year after the expiration of his previous parole unless there is the death of the nearest relative. The cost of police escort shall be borne by the prisoner before his parole release.

b) Regular parole:

Time limit: 1 month

Reason:

1. A family member’s (which includes father, mother, spouse, son, daughter) serious illness
2. A family member’s death or an accident. (Same as custody parole, as stated above)
3. A member of the family marries.
4. The convict’s wife gives birth to the child (except for high-security risk prisoners).
5. Maintain social or familial ties.
6. Natural calamities cause serious harm to the convict’s family’s life or possessions.
7. Continue to file a Special Leave Petition.

LAW GOVERNING PROVISION OF PAROLE

1. The Prison Act of 1894
2. The Prison Act of 1900
3. The Prison (Bombay Furlough and Parole) Rules, 1959

Section 432 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 governs the provisions related to the power to suspend or remit sentences. In a case, it was substantially stated that the section 432 does not apply to parole[ii]

Because there is no inclusion of provisions related to parole in CrPC and there is no specific legislation in India that deals with it, each state has its own regulations governing it. Due to this, there is high ambiguity in the matter concerning parole. The United States of America, as well as the United Kingdom, has codified parole legislation and in India, such decisions are solely based on statutes and judgments.

GETAWAY FROM CRIME AND REOFFENCE

The question of whether the true objective of the concept of parole is fulfilled or it’s just a breakthrough arises. The Manu Sharma case gained a wide public outrage due to jail and state mismanagement which granted and distinctly supported the guilty in Jessica Lal's murder case.[iii]

Another famous case was Bibi Jagir Kaur, she was sentenced to prison due to the murder of her daughter. However, the charges against her were discharged and she was acquitted in 2018. She was sentenced to 5 years in jail but soon after she was granted parole. She was given preferential treatment because she was the Cabinet Minister of Punjab.[iv]

Bitti Mohanty's case is also a bigshot case where external influence can be seen. He was the son of the DGP of Orissa and he was convicted of raping a German national. He was given 7 years imprisonment as well as a fine. In November 2006, he was given 15-day parole to visit his ill mother and his father was his surety at that time. Soon after he defected, and his father claimed that he was unaware of Bitti’s movements. He was then traced in Kerela in March 2013 after 7 years due to a tip received. But till then the acquitted had changed his name and also denied confirming his identity as Bitti Mohanty.[v]

The convict who was held due to Ajmer blast, Jaipur serial blast, Malegaon blast cases, Dr. Jalees Ansari alias Dr. Bomb was released recently on parole. He was life-sentenced. He was last seen on 16th January 2020 when he was supposed to report the next day.[vi]

Releasing on parole also gives the offender a perfect chance to indulge in criminal activity while on probation. In Saibanna v State of Karnataka, the appellant was serving a life sentence for murdering his first wife. He was granted parole for 1 month and in the course of time, he murdered his second wife as well as inflicted up to 21 injuries on the child. The Supreme Court opined that this case was the rarest of rare cases which concluded as a perfect crime and the only justified punishment was a death sentence.[vii]

Similarly, in Krishan v State of Haryana[viii], the convicted was awarded life imprisonment and was already serving his life imprisonment and was on parole.

Mr. Atul Rai who won last year’s Lok Sabha from the Ghosi constituency in U.P was granted bail by the Allahabad High Court for taking an oath as a member of parliament in New Delhi.

PUNISHMENT FOR MISUSE OF PAROLE

The guts or temptation to commit an offense while on parole or misuse of parole may be reduced if there were rigorous punishment sanctioned. A parole breaker would be awarded 2 years of imprisonment. The jumpers who take advantage of the leverage given should be declined for any further paroles in further. For the safety of victims, the local police provide protection as well as do frequent patrols.

RIGHTS AND MATTER OF SOCIAL SECURITY

The parole should be granted on twofold consideration which is social security as well as social security. It is important to uphold article 21 of the Indian Constitution by not depriving his rights as a human being. The basic rights and liberties have however been curtailed during the period of the sentence. But that does not mean that the fundamental humane regard should be put aside and that he should not be allowed to enjoy some happy moments like a reunion with his family and friends or visiting family members in need. The long years of confinement without any kind of leisure would destroy someone’s mindset while interim release may reduce the criminal tendency.

The point in question is that social security should not be compromised on the cost of the victim or community’s safety. It holds great importance to monitor that the released guilty should not misuse the parole as a getaway from already committed offenses or recommit such offenses. Finding a proper balance between both these aspects is crucial for the State including the prison authorities. The authorities granting parole should be aware of the consequences. So, they should examine the circumstances thoroughly. They should apprehend the crime, the way it affected the victim, and the part played by the offender. They should also identify the pattern of the crime committed as well as the convict's social history and life decisions that ultimately led to such crime. The decision-maker should be aware of prisoners’ behavior in the jail as well as the responsibility which is to be carried out by the inmate on return. The premise of the parole should be objectively determined as well as should be adequately established. They must also ensure that the concept of parole does not send a wrong message to society. The gravity of parole on people should be carefully handled and appreciated.

In the article, we have observed that it is a trend in India to grant parole to politically influential or big-league people and it is a highly discriminating and saddening situation that the State decides the case before it is tried. Despite judicial activism, the incidences have been repeated and the state has still not taken rigorous steps to prevent such biases. The State Governments have time and again seen to commit such biases and shown an inclination towards political significance while denying the majority who have substantial grounds for seeking such privilege. Therefore, it is high time that the State should act in a justified manner without any prejudice and each case should be efficiently analyzed as well as objectively decided.

To conclude the article, Parole is a special retributive measure adopted and used in the Indian Criminal Justice system since parole is not a right unlike bail but rather leverage which is based on a ray of change. Indian penal laws were established during the popularity of neoclassical criminology and the deterrent type of punishment was famous. So, at that time it was challenging to accept the concept of parole. The parole provisions are still not recognized under the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, it has also been stated that when the society began to urbanize, it recognized the need for some liberate approach in terms of procedural laws and each state and territory might come up with their own parole rules. With increasing empathy in society, the use of retributive types of punishment increased.

REFERENCES

[i] S. C. Raina, Probation: Philosophy, Law, and Practice (Regency Publications New Delhi 1996) at p.6

[ii] Sunil Fulchand Shah v. Union of India 2000 ALL MR (Cri) 745, the Supreme Court said explicitly that “parole does not amount to suspension of sentence.”

[iii] Sidhartha Vashisht @ Manu Sharma vs. State (NCT of Delhi) (2010) 6 SCC 1

[iv] Central Bureau Investigation vs Bibi Jagir Kaur & Ors

[v]https://mumbaimirror.indiatimes.com/news/india/bitti-mohanty-released-from-jaipur-jail/articleshow/59475735.cms Updated: Jul 6, 2017, 19:04 IST

[vi] https://www.indiatoday.in/india/story/1993-mumbai-blasts-convict-dr-bomb-goes-missing-during-parole-1637551-2020-01-16 UPDATED: January 17, 2020, 00:20 IST

[vii] Saibanna v State of Karnataka (2005) 4 SCC 165

[viii] Krishan v State of Haryana Appeal (Crl.), 7s66 of 2008

DISCLAIMER: This article is an original submission of the Author. Niti Manthan does not hold any liability arising out of this article. Kindly refer to our terms of use or write to us in case of any concern.