The Supreme Court on Friday said furlough --- an incentive for good conduct for prisoners -- cannot be denied to a convict even if he is sentenced to spend the remainder of his whole life in prison.
"When furlough is an incentive towards good jail conduct, even if the person is otherwise not to get any remission and has to remain in prison for the whole of the remainder of his natural life, that does not, as a corollary, mean that his right to seek furlough is foreclosed," a bench of Justices Dinesh Maheshwari and Aniruddha Bose said.
The court was dealing with a plea by Atbir, who was declined furlough on the ground that the President had in 2012 commuted his death penalty to life imprisonment with a condition that he would remain in prison "for the whole of the remainder of his natural life without parole and there shall be no remission of the term of imprisonment".
The bench said that we find it difficult to agree with the reasoning and the contentions that once it has been provided by the President of India that the appellant would remain in prison for the whole of the remainder of his natural life without parole and without remission in the term of imprisonment, all his other rights, particularly those emanating from good jail conduct, as available in the Delhi Prison Rules of 2018 stand foreclosed.
The court pointed out in contradistinction to parole, in which the sentence is considered suspended, in furlough, the prisoner is deemed to be serving the sentence inasmuch as the period of furlough is not reduced from the actual serving period. And, the conduct is predominantly decisive of entitlement towards furlough. Thus, even if the appellant would be on furlough, he would be deemed to be serving the sentence for all time to come, it added.
"Even if the appellant is to remain in prison for the whole remainder of his life, the expectations from him of good conduct in jail would always remain; and the lawful consequences of good conduct, including that of furlough, cannot be denied, particularly when the same has not been prohibited in the order of the President," the bench said.
Referring to the appellant's case, the court said neither the requirements of his maintaining good conduct are whittled down nor the reformative approach and incentive for good conduct cease to exist in his relation. Thus, if he maintains good conduct, furlough cannot be denied as a matter of course, it added.
The court set aside the orders by the Delhi High Court as well as the Director-General of Prisons while disapproving blanket denial of furlough to the appellant and leaving the case for open examination by the authorities concerned in accordance with the law.
Watch the latest DH Videos here: