Convict’s right to file special leave petition in SC is crucial, says Delhi HC

A single judge bench of Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma in its December 22 order said, “Courts have consistently emphasized that the right of a convict to file a Special Leave Petition challenging the dismissal of their criminal appeal by a High Court is crucial right. This right cannot be denied based on the availability of free legal aid in jail and the possibility of filing the SLP from the jail premises. Given that the petitioner’s sole recourse for assailing his conviction now rests with the Hon’ble Apex Court, it is important to afford him the opportunity to pursue his legal remedy by filing the SLP through his chosen counsel”.

The HC, thereafter, granted four weeks’ parole to the man, furnishing a personal bond of Rs 15,000 with one surety of the same amount, subject to certain conditions.

The order rejecting the man’s parole said that his “overall jail conduct” was reported to be “unsatisfactory” and that he could file the SLP from the “jail itself, where free legal aid facility is available to all prisoners”.

The man had argued that the order rejecting the parole application was totally arbitrary and had been passed without any application of mind, in a mechanical manner. It was argued that the man’s conduct inside the custody has never been found objectionable in the last five years by the jail authorities. It was also argued that it is the constitutional right of every convict to be released on parole to prosecute proceedings before a higher court, as held by the HC in several judgments.

Meanwhile, Delhi government argued that the petitioner was a habitual offender and was involved in several other criminal cases. It was also stated that two punishments were given to the petitioner in 2017, due to which his overall jail conduct is unsatisfactory, and therefore, he should not be released on parole.

Justice Sharma, after considering the man’s jail conduct, said that except two incidents wherein punishment was awarded to him, the nominal roll did not find mention of any misconduct on his part after May, 2017 till date i.e. for the last more than six years.

The HC said, the nominal roll of November 28, 2023, mentioned that the jail conduct of the petitioner during the last one year was satisfactory. A nominal roll is a document which contains the prisoner’s details, including their previous releases or any misconduct committed during imprisonment.

“Therefore, this court is of the opinion that the order impugned herein was an order passed in a mechanical manner, without appreciating the contents of nominal roll and the rules for grant of parole under the Delhi Prison Rules, 2018,” the court held.