Can a convict seek furlough or parole by furnishing a surety through his/her relative or is it mandatory to have a local surety. The question has come up before the Bombay High Court in a few cases where the convicts are from other states making it difficult for them to give a local surety even though they are eligible for furlough. The state government is of the view that local surety is required as the convict might disappear once he avails the benefit of furlough and leaves the state. Division bench of Justice J N Patel and Justice Amjad Sayed said that its the job of the police to see prisoners dont flee. The government told the court that according to their recent circular,local surety has been made mandatory. However,the court pointed out that as per prison rules convicts can furnish surety through a relative. In one case a convict hailing from Jharkand is seeking furlough but could not furnish a local surety. His lawyer Yug Mohit Chaudhry submitted that the convicts brother is ready to come down and furnish a surety. Additional public prosecutor Aruna Kamat Pai also submitted that theres an adverse police report from Jharkand against the convict. According to the report sent by Hazaribagh police station,the convict,currently lodged in Kolhapur prison,resides in a terrorist area. Chaudhry then argued that denying parole because of area of residence defied logic. The court also pointed out that the man was not convicted for terrorist activities and was in prison for murder. Pai said if a convict flees then a whole lot of other processes like issuing a proclamation notice will have to follow. Pai has sought time till Monday so that the prison authorities can ascertain if a local person can stand surety.
