In Brief
A religious guru convicted of rape, sexual assault, and witness intimidation applied for furlough (temporary prison release) after completing seven years of a life sentence. The High Court granted it, citing eligibility under prison rules. The Supreme Court reversed this decision, holding that although furlough becomes eligible periodically, it is not an absolute right but discretionary. The Court found substantial grounds to refuse furlough: attempts to bribe officials, coordinated attacks on witnesses by followers, threats to police officers, and evidence of a loyal criminal network willing to commit offences at the respondent's direction. Although the respondent had previously been released on furlough without incident, the cumulative evidence of ongoing threats to public peace and witness safety justified denial. The Court upheld the prison authorities' reasoned assessment of public safety concerns."
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.