Court Directs Release on Personal Bond, Establishes Guidelines to Prevent Discrimination Against Economically Disadvantaged Prisoners
In a landmark decision, the Rajasthan High Court has ruled that indigent prisoners cannot be denied parole due to their inability to furnish surety bonds. The court has directed the release of Khartaram, a life convict, on a personal bond, emphasizing that financial incapacity should not impede a prisoner's constitutional rights to equality and dignity.
Khartaram, who is serving a life sentence in Central Jail Jodhpur for offences under sections 302/34 of the IPC, had repeatedly sought the court's intervention after being unable to meet the surety requirements imposed by the parole authorities. Despite prior judicial waivers of surety conditions, the parole committee had insisted on sureties, reflecting what the court described as a "disturbing institutional apathy to the rule of law."
The bench, comprising Justices Arun Monga and Farjand Ali, highlighted that parole serves as a rehabilitative and humanitarian measure within penal jurisprudence, and its conditions must align with constitutional mandates of fairness, reasonableness, and non-arbitrariness under Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India. The insistence on surety bonds from an indigent prisoner, they noted, is legally unsustainable, constitutionally impermissible, and morally indefensible.
In its judgment, the court also issued comprehensive guidelines to ensure that economically disadvantaged prisoners are not unjustly barred from availing parole. These include adjusting the amount of personal bonds to match the prisoner's economic status and waiving surety conditions for indigent prisoners when financial incapacity is evident. The court directed that these guidelines be implemented uniformly to prevent unnecessary litigation and ensure the humane exercise of discretion by parole authorities.
The ruling echoes sentiments from previous cases, including the Supreme Court's stance in Moti Ram v. State of Madhya Pradesh, underscoring that conditions which effectively bar indigent prisoners from parole violate the constitutional guarantee of equality before the law.
Khartaram's release marks a significant step towards aligning parole practices with constitutional values, ensuring that economic status does not become a barrier to justice and rehabilitation. The judgment is expected to set a precedent for similar cases, promoting a more equitable approach to parole across the state.
Bottom Line:
Financial incapacity of a prisoner should not operate as a disqualifier for availing parole, and insistence on surety bonds from indigent prisoners violates constitutional rights of equality and dignity.
Statutory provision(s): Rajasthan Prisoners Release on Parole Rules, 2021, Constitution of India Articles 14 and 21, Prison Act, 1894 Section 59
Khartaram v. State of Rajasthan, (Rajasthan)(DB) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2833762
