The Delhi High Court has ruled that the desire of a person accused under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) to console his ill parents cannot by itself constitute a sufficient ground for emergent parole.
Facts
An under-trial accused facing charges under the UAPA sought emergency parole to visit his ailing parents. The prison authorities and the court were asked to consider his humanitarian plea.
Court’s Reasoning
The Court held that parole or emergency release is not automatic and especially in sensitive cases under the UAPA, the applicant must show special circumstances that justify release despite the serious nature of the charges.
It emphasised that mere personal hardships, such as wanting to console parents, do not meet the threshold for emergent relief where national security or public interest may be involved.
The Court observed that granting parole in such cases requires balancing the rights of the accused with the broader interests of justice, public safety and the integrity of the investigation.
Outcome
The application for emergent parole was denied. The Court directed that alternative arrangements, such as meeting under supervision or video‐link, may be considered, but full parole was refused based on the nature of the offence and applicable law.
Significance
This decision underscores that in UAPA matters, even humanitarian pleas must be weighed against the serious national security considerations involved. The threshold for parole is higher and applicants must present compelling grounds beyond routine personal or familial suffering.
