Limitation Act | Litigant Cannot Be Punished For Court's Own Docket Load: J&K High Court Illicit Affair Alone Cannot Make a Man Guilty of Abetting Suicide: Supreme Court Quashes Charge Under Section 306 IPC Landlord Cannot Be Punished for Slowness of Courts: Supreme Court on Bonafide Need in Eviction Suits Expect States To Enact Laws Regulating Unlicensed Money Lenders Charging Exorbitant Interest Contrary To 'Damdupat': Supreme Court Accused Who Skips Lok Adalat After Seeking It, Then Cries 'Prejudice', Cannot Claim Apprehension of Denial of Justice: Madras High Court Refuse To Transfer Case IO Cannot Act Without Prior Sanction: Gujarat High Court Grants Bail, Flags Procedural Lapse in Religious Conversion Case Electricity Board Strictly Liable For Unprotected Transformer, 7-Year-Old Cannot Be Guilty Of Contributory Negligence: Allahabad High Court POCSO Conviction Can't Stand For Offence Not Charged: Delhi High Court Member of Unlawful Assembly Cannot Escape Conviction By Claiming He Only Carried a Lathi and Struck No One: Allahabad High Court Jurisdiction Cannot Be Founded On Casual Or Incidental Facts If Not Have A Direct Nexus With The Lis: : Delhi High Court Clause Stating Disputes "Can" Be Settled By Arbitration Is Not A Binding Arbitration Agreement: Supreme Court State Cannot Plead Helplessness Against Sand Mafia; Supreme Court Warns Of Paramilitary Deployment, Complete Mining Ban In MP & Rajasthan Authority Cannot Withdraw Subsidy Citing Non-Compliance When It Ignored Repeated Requests For Inspection: Supreme Court Out-of-State SC/ST/OBC Candidates Cannot Claim Rajasthan's Reservation Benefits in NEET PG Counselling: Rajasthan High Court Supreme Court Upholds Haryana's Regularisation Of Qualified Ad Hoc Staff As 'One-Time Measure', Strikes Down Futuristic Cut-Offs

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