Mumbai Court Rules on Furlough for Convicted Murderer

In a significant ruling, the Nagpur bench of the Bombay High Court has stated that being unmarried is not a valid reason to deny furlough to a prisoner. The court's decision came in response to the application of Pralhad Feku Gupta, a Uttar Pradesh native serving a life sentence for double murder, who sought a 28-day furlough to spend time with his family. Gupta's mother offered to act as surety, emphasizing the importance of family support during his incarceration. The state advocate, Nandita Tripathi, opposed the furlough request, highlighting Gupta's three concurrent life sentences and the serious nature of his crimes. However, the court noted that the prison authorities had rejected the application based solely on Gupta's marital status and age, suggesting that these factors should not be the sole determinants in such decisions. The judges emphasized the need for a balanced approach, considering the inmate's familial responsibilities and the potential benefits of temporary release. The court criticized the prison authorities for relying on police reports without a thorough evaluation of Gupta's situation. It asserted that long periods of incarceration without family contact can be detrimental to both the individual and society. The judges proposed that appropriate conditions could be established to mitigate any risks of fleeing, thereby allowing for a more nuanced consideration of furlough applications. Ultimately, the court annulled the previous rejection of Gupta's furlough request and instructed the authorities to reassess his application within three weeks, underscoring the importance of family ties in the rehabilitation process.