The news on Saturday that the authorities had rejected Sanjay Dutt’s application to have his furlough extended was probably the first time that regular prisoners have been able to relate to the actor’s experience behind bars. Thus far, Dutt has received furlough and parole with greater swiftness than most others.His release on furlough on Christmas Eve was the third time has received parole or furlough since May 2013, when he started serving the remainder of a five-year prison term for illegally possessing and destroying arms in the March 1993 serial blasts case . He has been out of jail for 132 days so far.His supporters claim that the actor has only received what is due to him. Furlough is a prisoner’s right. It is a 14-day annual leave from jail, extendable by another 14 days for a valid reason. The purpose of furlough is to allow a prisoner to receive medical treatment, or to keep in touch with their families and the outside world. Though Dutt was granted furlough for medical reasons, he was photographed attending high-profile film events.Parole, on the other hand, is a privilege granted to a prisoner in case of an emergency, such as the death of a family member or a serious medical condition. Prisoners can get 30 days of parole each year, which could later be extended by another 60 days, though this is comparatively rare phenomenon.As a result, a well-behaved (or well-placed) prisoner could stay out of jail for a maximum of 118 days each year.However, prisoners without connections rarely receive so much time away. They have to go through a rigorous process of verification at several levels. One slip up could delay their reprieve or have it blocked.

Parole in Maharashtra prisons



To begin with, prisoners have to get someone to stand surety for them, which isn’t always easy, said lawyer YP Singh. The person standing surety pays an amount of money to the authorities and promises them that the inmate will return to prison at the designated time. If the inmate does not do so, the person standing surety stands to could lose the surety amount he has paid or whatever he has agreed to in the undertaking. “There are several occasions when a prisoner is behind bars for years without getting parole just because no one is willing to stand surety for him/her,” Singh said.Even if family members are willing to stand surety, they need to have several documents like ration card, property papers, else they are not eligible. Often, said Singh, the authorities demand an independent surety with “reasonable credibility” from outside the family. Reasonable credibility could mean adequate solvency, ownership of property and control over the person for whom he is standing surety.Another hindrance is that a few years back the surety amount has been raised from Rs 100 – something everyone could afford – to thousands of rupees, depending upon the type of crime. This is another hurdle for prisoners from economically poorer backgrounds.The Bombay High Court thought it fit to mention this last year, while hearing a public interest litigation filed against the parole granted to Dutt. “You are releasing him on a bond of Rs. 5,000, when other ordinary convicts are asked to submit bonds of Rs 15,000-Rs 20,000,” the court noted.The only exception is death parole, under which a prisoner is allowed to attend the last rites of a relative without having to pay the surety amount.Also weighing against those from humbler backgrounds is that they are not aware about their rights and how to go about obtaining them. Many are too poor to afford lawyers to inform them of facilities like parole or furlough.It is this background that Dutt’s frequent absences from jail, even though well within his rights, seems unusual.But Maharashtra’s Additional Director General of Police (prisons) Meeran Borwankar said that the perception of some people getting preferential treatment was unfounded. “The process of granting parole/furlough is a quasi-judicial process and not an administrative one,” she said. “This means that the process is open to judicial and public review. Which officer would want to put himself in the dock by doing favours to particular prisoners?”