The Court directed release of a life convict on already sanctioned two-week furlough, holding that a co-convict’s parole cannot by itself block release when the convict is required for his daughter’s Class XI admission.
Court Orders Release Of Life Convict
The Delhi High Court has held that jail authorities cannot deny furlough to a convict only because his co-convict is already out on parole.
Justice Manoj Jain passed the order while hearing a plea filed by a life convict.
The authorities had already sanctioned the petitioner’s two-week furlough. However, jail officials did not release him because his co-convict was on parole.
Furlough Sought For Daughter’s School Admission
The petitioner approached the High Court for release on furlough.
He submitted that he needed to assist in securing admission for his 16-year-old daughter into Class XI.
He also expressed concern that his co-convict may seek extension of parole. As a result, his own release could face further delay, despite the sanctioned furlough.
Delhi Prison Rules Do Not Create Absolute Bar
The Court examined the relevant provisions of the Delhi Prison Rules.
It noted that the rules ordinarily do not permit simultaneous release of co-convicts.
However, the Court clarified that the rules do not impose an absolute ban. Therefore, authorities must consider the facts of each case.
Furlough Is Incentive For Good Conduct
The Court also explained the purpose of furlough.
It observed that furlough works as an incentive for good conduct. Therefore, authorities should not treat a co-convict’s parole as an automatic bar.
The Court said the petitioner needed release for an important family responsibility. In such circumstances, the co-convict’s parole should not become a “stumbling block”.
The Court observed:
“Grant of furlough is, merely, an incentive for good conduct and the fact that co-accused is already on parole, should not be a stumbling block when it comes to securing admission for his child.”
Release Directed Within Three Days
Accordingly, the Delhi High Court directed the competent authority to release the petitioner within three days.
The Court ordered his release for the two-week furlough period already sanctioned.
Case Details
Case Title: Vicky @ Gobind v. State
Case No.: W.P.(CRL) 1389/2026
Court: Delhi High Court
Judge: Justice Manoj Jain
Appearance
For Petitioner: Mr. Anup Kumar Das with Ms. Prachi Sharma and Ms. Ishita Singh, Advocates
For State: Mr. Sanjay Lao, Standing Counsel (Crl.) with SI Rohit, PS Uttam Nagar
