Live
- India Faces Blow as Pacer Mohammed Shami Ruled Out for Remainder of Australia Series
- Biden Pardon: Joe Biden Commutes Death Sentences of 37 Inmates, Including Child Killers and Mass Murderers
- South Korea: Yoon believes impeachment trial takes priority over martial law probe
- Strict Action for Non-Adherence to Time Management - DMHO Dr. Swarajya Lakshmi
- Over 13.29 lakh houses approved for rural poor in Maharashtra: Shivraj Chouhan
- District Collector Urges Timely Completion of Indiramma Housing Scheme Survey
- Digital Arrest Scam: Hyderabad Man Duped of ₹7 Lakhs by Fake Crime Branch Police Callers
- Sukhbir Badal seeks President's Police medal for officer who saved his life
- US Firm Accordion Acquires Merilytics, Launches 1,500-Seater Office in Hyderabad
- Free Medical Camp Organized by Alampur Advocate Bar Association
Conviction for sexual offences not ground for denying furlough: Delhi High Court
The Delhi High Court has said that a conviction for committing sexual offences should not serve as a basis for denying the benefit of furlough to an otherwise eligible prisoner.
New Delhi: The Delhi High Court has said that a conviction for committing sexual offences should not serve as a basis for denying the benefit of furlough to an otherwise eligible prisoner.
Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma said that individuals convicted of sexual offences cannot be deprived of furlough benefits, which they are otherwise eligible for, on erroneous grounds.
Convict Gopi Nisha Mallah had sought the quashing of an order issued by the Delhi government on September 4, which had rejected his request for furlough.
The court granted a 21-day furlough to Mallah, who had been convicted in a Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) case and sentenced to life imprisonment in 2018.
His request for furlough was based on the need to maintain social ties with family and friends.
The court took into account Mallah's nominal roll, which indicated that he had been in judicial custody for approximately 9 years and 7 months, with 1 year and 8 months of remission earned.
The court also noted that Mallah had previously been granted interim bail and parole during the trial, and there were no reports of misuse of liberty or complaints of late surrender.
Justice Sharma further said that Mallah's conduct in jail over the past year, as well as his overall behaviour, had been satisfactory, with no instances of misconduct reported.
Given these circumstances, the court concluded that the petitioner's request for furlough to maintain social ties with family and friends should not be denied. Consequently, the court allowed the petition and set aside the order dated September 4 issued by the respondent.
