Convict Can't Be Granted Parole For Maintaining Conjugal Relationship With Live-In-Partner When He Already Has Legally Wedded Wife: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court has observed that the law in India as well as the Delhi Prison Rules do not permit grant of parole to a convict on the ground of maintaining conjugal relationships with a live-in partner, when he already has a legally wedded wife.

Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma observed that a convict cannot be granted parole on the ground of having a child or to maintain conjugal relationships with a live-in partner where he already has a legally wedded wife and children are born out of that wedlock.

Observing that it would set a harmful precedent, the court said that a live-in-partner, when the legally wedded wife of the convict is already alive and they already have three children, cannot claim to have a fundamental right to have a child with the convict.

“Moreover, in this Court's opinion, granting parole on the ground to have a child or to maintain conjugal relationships with a live-in partner, where the convict already has a legally wedded wife and children born out of that wedlock, would set a harmful precedent,” the court said.

It added: “In case parole is granted on such grounds, it will open a flood gate of such petitions where many convicts may seek parole on the ground that they have a live-in partner apart from their legally wedded partner or in case of an unmarried convict, a live-in partner who may want to have a child with the convict.”

Justice Sharma made the observations while dismissing a plea moved by a murder convict seeking grant of parole for four weeks to consummate his marriage with his live-in-partner and for maintaining social ties.

The woman was mentioned in his petition as his wife. The convict had also not revealed that he had not separated legally from his first wife with whom he had three children.

Rejecting the plea, the court held that a live-in partner, who lacks legal recognition as a wife or a spouse, cannot be held to fall within the scope of the definition of “family” under Delhi Prison Rules.

The Rules defined “family” a prisoner as grandparents, parents, brothers, sisters, spouse, children and grandchildren.

“Therefore, though the Delhi Prisons Rules recognize the illness of a family member as a ground for considering application for parole, such „family member‟ would not include the petitioner‟s live- in partner, who as per the interim application filed in this case, is ill and requires treatment,” the court said.

It however clarified that the court neither authorized nor wished to comment on any person's personal life or choices and the relationships that he as an adult maintains with his wife or adult partner.

“This Court does not mix or confuse law with general or individual morality or moral beliefs or conduct of two individuals which in the opinion of this Court are the individual choices of two adults. This kind of relationship also cannot come under the scanner of the Courts who have no business to interfere in the personal lives of two adults without there being any criminal complaint against them,” the court said.

It added: “However, when this kind of relationship is brought before the Court and the parties seek refuge and relief under the existing law, the Court without being swayed by its own morality or the general morality of the society has to decide it purely on the basis of the existing laws and prison rules.”

Counsel for Petitioner: Mr. Ansh Makkar and Mr. Vaibhav Sinha, Advocates

Counsel for Respondents: Mr. Amol Sinha, ASC for the State; Mr. Kshitiz Garg, Mr. Ashvini Kumar and Ms. Chavi Lazarus, Advocates

Title: SONU SONKAR v. THE LT GOVERNOR, DELHI & ORS.

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 570

Click here to read order