- The Karnataka High Court refused to extend the parole leave of a life convict suffering from COVID-19 disease.
- Principle of criminal jurisprudence that release of a convict on parole or furlough cannot be sought as a matter of right
- The petitioner was convicted for the offences punishable u/s 302,120B, 324, 341, 427 r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code 1860.
- He was released on parole on 19.03.2021 for a period of 30-days, in terms of Standing Orders of Director General of Police, Prisons & Correctional Services, and by Chief Superintendent of Central Prison.
- He got an extension of the parole for the same period vide order dated 05.08.2021; similarly, he secured a second extension vide order dated 31.08.2021 for another spell of 30 days which came to an end on 05.10.2021.
- He made a representation dated 28.09.2021 before Respondent 1 for extension of parole for another 60 days, on the ground of COVID-related health issues in support, which came to be rejected, and thus he approached the court.
- A single bench of Justice Krishna S Dixit dismissed the petition filed by Rashi Kumara who had been on parole leave since March 18
- The court junked the contention of the accused that the jails are overcrowded and therefore, his case be considered sympathetically.
- The petitioner was ordered to report back to the jail on or before 11.10.2021, 3.30 pm at the latest.
- What are your views on this?
- What is Section 120B of the IPC?
Share your views in the comments section below.