The Delhi High Court recently denied a plea for parole from a murder convict, Sonu Sonkar, who sought temporary release to maintain marital relations with his live-in partner. Justice Swarn Kanta Sharma, presiding over the case, emphasized that Indian law does not sanction parole based on maintaining marital ties with live-in partners.
Justice Sharma highlighted that allowing parole solely for the purpose of marital relations with a live-in partner, particularly when the convict’s legal spouse is alive, would establish a problematic precedent. Granting such parole could trigger a deluge of similar petitions from convicts claiming similar rights, potentially complicating the legal landscape.
The court pointed out that under the Delhi Prison Rules, 2018, a live-in partner does not qualify as a family member, hence cannot be considered for parole based on maintaining marital relations. Additionally, the absence of legal recognition as a spouse precludes the live-in partner from falling under the definition of ‘family’ as outlined in the rules.
Also read: Japanese Delegation Explores Food Processing Collaboration with NIFTEM-K
The case in question involved Sonkar, who had previously been granted parole on multiple occasions. However, during one such parole period, he purportedly entered into a relationship with another woman and sought parole again to sustain this relationship. Yet, he failed to provide any documentation proving the alleged marriage or demonstrating a divorce from his first wife.
Justice Sharma scrutinized the situation and dismissed the relevance of Sonkar’s purported marriage, noting that the woman in question was already pregnant and had experienced the unfortunate loss of a child. Furthermore, Sonkar already had three children from his legal marriage, further complicating the matter.
In essence, the Delhi High Court’s ruling underscored the importance of upholding the existing legal framework regarding parole eligibility, particularly concerning relationships outside of legal marriage.
