Length of jail term needn’t entitle convict for parole: Karnataka high court

Bengaluru: The high court dismissed a petition by 72-year-old Ambarish S Kapadia, a Mumbai resident and convict lodged at Central Prison, Bengaluru, seeking two months’ parole on the ground that he has been in jail for 14 years.

The court observed that length of incarceration by itself does not entitle a convict to parole when weighed against antecedents and the nature of offences.

Kapadia approached HC seeking parole, stating that though the court in Nov 2020 directed consideration of his application for parole, the authorities did not act on it as he was transferred to Ahmedabad prison in connection with a CBI case.

Opposing the petition, P Prasanna Kumar, special public prosecutor for CBI, submitted that the petitioner was convicted in six cases and was, therefore, disentitled to seek parole in view of Rule 192(2)(1)(i) of Karnataka Prison Rules, 1974.

Justice Sachin Shankar Magadum noted that HC’s Nov 2020 order was only to consider the petitioner’s representation and it did not confer any vested or enforceable right to parole.

“The petitioner has been convicted in six criminal cases, which by itself indicates a pattern of repeated criminality. The offences, as borne out from records, involve serious allegations of economic offences such as cheating, forgery and misappropriation, which affect public confidence. One of the cases is under CBI’s jurisdiction, indicating the gravity and complexity of the offences. The petitioner’s antecedents do not inspire confidence so as to extend the benefit of temporary release. His contention that he has undergone 14 years of imprisonment, though a relevant factor, cannot be viewed in isolation,” the judge said while rejecting the petition.