Employees Cannot Pick Favourable Terms and Reject the Rest: Bombay High Court Upholds SIDBI’s Cut-Off Date for Pension to CPF Optees Rules of the Game Were Never Changed: Delhi High Court Upholds CSIR’s Power to Prescribe Minimum Threshold in CASE-2023 Resignation Does Not Forfeit Earned Pension: Calcutta High Court Declares Company Superannuation Benefit as ‘Wages’ Under Law Fraud Vitiates Everything—Stranger Can File Independent Suit Against Compromise Decree: Bombay High Court Refuses to Reject 49-Year-Old Challenge at Threshold Mere Long Possession By One Co-Owner Does Not Destroy The Co-Ownership Right Of The Other: Madras High Court State Cannot Hide Behind An Illegal Undertaking: Punjab & Haryana High Court Questions Denial Of Retrospective Regularization Article 21-A Cannot Be Held Hostage to Transfer Preferences: Allahabad High Court Upholds Teacher Redeployment to Enforce Pupil–Teacher Ratio Arbitrator Cannot Rewrite Contract Or Travel Beyond Pleadings: Punjab & Haryana High Court Quashes ₹5.18 Crore Award Director’ in GeM Clause 29 Does Not Mean ‘Independent Director’: Gujarat High Court Sets Aside Technical Disqualification Section 25(3) Is Sacrosanct – Removal of a Trademark Cannot Rest on a Defective Notice: Delhi High Court Not Every Broken Promise Is Rape: Delhi High Court Draws Clear Line Between ‘Suspicion’ and ‘Grave Suspicion’ in False Promise to Marry Case Section 37 Is Not A Second Appeal On Merits: Delhi High Court Refuses To Re-Appreciate Evidence In Challenge To Arbitral Award Recovery After Retirement Is Clearly Impermissible: Bombay High Court Shields Retired Teacher From ₹2.80 Lakh Salary Recovery Paying Tax Does Not Legalise Illegality: Bombay High Court Refuses to Shield Alleged Unauthorized Structure Beneficial Pension Scheme Cannot Be Defeated By Cut-Off Dates: Andhra Pradesh High Court Directs EPFO To Follow Sunil Kumar B. Guidelines On Higher Pension Claims Equity Aids the Vigilant, Not Those Who Sleep Over Their Rights: Punjab & Haryana High Court Refuses to Revive 36-Year-Old Pay Parity Claim Students Cannot Be Penalised For Legislative Invalidity: Supreme Court Protects Degrees Granted Before 2005 Yash Pal Verdict Restructuring Without Fulfilment of Conditions Cannot Defeat Insolvency: Supreme Court Reaffirms Default as the Sole Trigger Under Section 7 IBC Section 100-A CPC Slams The Door On Intra-Court Appeals In RERA Matters”: Allahabad High Court Declares Special Appeal Not Maintainable Mental Distance Between ‘May Be’ and ‘Must Be’ Is Long: Patna High Court Acquits Six in Murder Case Built on Broken Chain of Circumstances Where Corruption Takes Roots, Rule of Law Is Replaced by Rule of Transaction: Punjab & Haryana High Court Denies Bail to DIG Harcharan Singh Bhullar Mere Voter List and Corrected SSC Certificate Cannot Prove Paternity: Andhra Pradesh High Court Rejects 21-Year-Old Bid for DNA Test in Partition Appeal Section 147 NI Act Makes Offence Compoundable At Any Stage: Karnataka High Court Sets Aside Concurrent Convictions in Cheque Bounce Case After Settlement Bald Allegations of Adultery Based on Suspicion Cannot Dissolve a Marriage: Jharkhand High Court Once a Document Is Admitted in Evidence, Its Stamp Defect Cannot Be Reopened: Madras High Court

Gujarat High Court Upholds Denial of Furlough to Naryan Swami - Concerns of Public Safety

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a recent judgment, the Gujarat High Court has upheld the decision of the authorities to deny furlough to a convict, emphasizing the need to balance the reformation of the convict with the interests of public safety and law and order. The court stated, "While meting out humane treatment to the convicts, care is taken to ensure that kindness to the convicts does not result in cruelty to society."

The petitioner had invoked the extraordinary writ jurisdiction under Article 227 read with Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India, seeking release on furlough. However, the court, acknowledging the discretionary nature of furlough and the need to consider public interest, upheld the decision of the authorities to deny the petitioner's request.

The court took into account the circumstances and opinions presented by the authorities while refusing furlough. These included the gravity of the offenses committed by the petitioner, criminal misconduct during the trial, threats and assaults on witnesses, and the petitioner's reported illegal activities inside the jail. The authorities also expressed concerns about the petitioner's potential influence on his followers and the possibility of him fleeing the country with their aid.

Highlighting the convict's conduct, the court noted instances of the petitioner's involvement in organized crime, threats to law enforcement officials, and attempts to disrupt the legal process. The court also highlighted the petitioner's contemptuous behavior, such as submitting a fake medical certificate to the court.

The judgment emphasized the court's responsibility to ensure that the constitutional purpose of deprivation of freedom is not defeated by the prison administration. It concluded that releasing the petitioner on furlough would pose a risk to public safety and undermine the objectives of imprisonment. Therefore, the court found justification in the authorities' decision to deny furlough.

Date of Decision: 08 June 2023

ASHUMAL HARPALANI vs STATE OF GUJARAT

Latest Legal News