MEANING OF PAROLE

Parole is the release of a prisoner, either temporarily for a special purpose or completely before the expiry of a
sentence, on the promise of good behavior; such a promise is known as a word of honour provided in the parole order.
The word parole is derived from the French 'je donne ma parole 'I give my word.' i.e. the word of honour. This word
was used by the prisoners of war for their release by giving promise to the captor.
Therefore, in simple words, Parole is the pre-mature conditional temporary release of a prisoner on the terms of
abiding by the conditions along with the observance of certain restrictions to avail the privilege of returning back to
the society and socialize with family and friends keeping in mind correctional theory and preparing to return back to
his social life. It is mere suspension of the sentence for time-being keeping the quantum of sentence intact. If the
paroled prisoners violate the conditions on which they are released, they may be returned back to the prison.
HISTORY OF PAROLE
The idea of parole was introduced in 1840 by Alexander Maconochie, a Scottish geographer and captain in the royal
navy.. He was appointed as Superintendent of British penal colonies. Instead of necessitating the prisoners to serve
their sentence hopelessly until full sentence had been served, he aimed to punish the prisoners for the deed
committed and to train them for the future. He developed a plan and divided it into 3 grade system. The first and
second grade group was mainly for the promotions earned through good behavior, study and labor. The third grade
consisted of obtaining conditional liberty outside the prison while obeying rules. On violation of such rules, the
prisoner would return back to prison and would start all over again the rank of three-grade process. The ticket to the
'leave system' was reformed and this led to what many consider as world's first parole system. The prisoners who were
served indeterminate sentences i.e. open ended sentences could now be released if they show evidences of reforming
and rehabilitation. Through participation in the grade system which was based on the unit of marks, ensured they
earned marks for their good behavior and lost marks on their bad behavior and could spend them on passage to higher
classification statuses ultimately conveying freedom.
This thought was based on the ideology that a sentence should not be a mere arbitrary sentence but a source for
reformation and the greed to return back to the society. Francis Lieber's thoughts on parole later reappeared in The
Hague Convention, Declaration of Brussels of 1874 and the Geneva Convention relative to the treatment of prisoners
of war. In 1847, parole was first coined in a correctional context by Samvel G. Howe, a Boston penal reformer.
OBJECTIVES
Parole leaves are progressive measures of correctional services. The main objectives to release the prisoners on leave
as per rule 1(A) and 19 of The Prisons (Bombay Furlough and Parole) Rules, 1959, are as follows:

 To enable the prisoner to maintain continuity with his family life and deal with family matters.
 To save the prisoner from evil effects of continuous prison life.
 To enable the prisoner to maintain and develop his self-confidence.
 To enable the prisoner to develop constructive hope and active interest in life.
PAROLE IS NOT COVERED BY SECTION 432 OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE, 1973
Section 432 of Cr.P.C deals with Power to Suspend or Remit Sentences. However, Supreme Court, in Sunil Fulchand
Shah v. Union of India, reported in AIR 2000 SC 1023, has categorically observed that "parole does not amount to
suspension of sentence''. From this it becomes clear that parole cannot be covered by Section 432 of Criminal
Procedure Code.
The grant of parole is governed by rules made under Prison Act, 1894 and Prison Act, 1900. Many State governments
have also formulated guidelines to bring out objectivity and facilitate decision-making to determine whether parole
needs to be granted in a particular case or not. Such decisions are taken in accordance with guidelines framed from
time to time. The Prisons (Bombay Furlough and Parole) Rules, 1959, have been enacted by exercising rule making
power under section 59(5) of the Prisons Act, 1984.
Furlough is for breaking the monotony of imprisonment and is granted as a good conduct remission. Furlough is a brief
release from the prison, it is conditional and is given in case of a long-term imprisonment. The period of sentence
spent on furlough by the prisoners need not be undergone by the prisoner as is done in parole. Following are the
different types of Parole:
a) Regular Parole
All prisoners eligible for furlough shall be eligible for regular parole for the following stated reasons:
Delivery of child by wife (except high security risk prisoners)
Serious illness of father/mother/spouse/ son/daughter
In case of natural calamities such as flood, house collapse, earthquake, fire etc.
To pursue the filing of special leave petition before supreme court against a judgment delivered by High Court
convicting or upholding the conviction, as the case may be.
b) Emergency Parole or Custody parole
All convicted persons except foreigners and those serving death sentence may be eligible for emergency parole for 14
days for reasons like death of grandfather or grandmother/ father/mother/spouse/son/ daughter/ brother/sister and
marriage of son/ daughter/ brother/sister, provided that no extension can be granted to emergency parole.
Emergency parole is granted by Superintendent of police for the reasons of death of parental grandfather or
grandmother/ father/ mother/spouse/son/ daughter/ brother/ sister and by concerned Dy. I.G. for the reason of
marriage of son/daughter/brother/ sister and the authority approving emergency parole shall decide whether to grant
parole under police escort or with a condition to report daily to the local police station depending upon the crime
committed by the prisoner and his conduct during his stay. The expenses of police escort will be borne by the prisoner
himself prior to his release on parole.
A prisoner shall not be released on regular or emergency parole for a period of one year after the expiry of his last
emergency or regular parole except in case of death of his nearest relatives mentioned above.
CONCLUSION
The provisions of parole are not well-known by the common man and often considered to be quite cumbersome.
Awareness was possible after media highlighted about the grant of parole in high profile cases. The Rules of the
Central government framed in 1955 are the skeleton and there is undoubtedly an affirmative need for updating these
rules and thereby enunciating comprehensive provisions so as to provide suitable guidelines to those who have to
consider applications for grant of parole. Grant of parole enables inmates an opportunity to maintain their social
relations and ties to facilitate bouncing back into the society on their service of sentence. Parole had often been
integral part of English and American system. Sir Alexander Paterson had said in 1930 that no human being can stand
prison life for more than 10 years. If the goal of imprisonment is reformation, on which he further said that there
should not be a second opinion, there should be no hesitation on the part of the legislature to effect it. Parole is
claimed to be a success in rehabilitation and checking the attitude of the convict during the parole. It acts like an
executive action after the door has been shut on the convict. However, not all people are equal and there are
exceptional cases where there has been misuse of the parole granted and convicts have fled away thereby, abusing
the privilege granted. Having said that, it should also not take away an opportunity from the convicts who can emerge
as a successful person with the help of parole as measure of penal reform. It is rightly said that criminality is the
expression of a `symptom' of certain disorder in the offenders and they can be easily diagnosed and correct treatment
administered to them. Knowing the fact that parole is not a right but a privilege upon the good behavior observed,
allowing them to reinstate in the social environment and giving a fair opportunity to rehabilitate is what can bring the
change in them and in the society instead of merely overcrowding the prisons.

From prisons to communities: Confronting re-entry challenges and social inequality

Over 600,000 individuals are released from prison annually and three-quarters of them are rearrested within five years
of their release (Bureau of Justice Statistics, 2005). Men and women released from correctional facilities receive
minimal preparation and inadequate assistance and resources, which makes their re-entry into communities
challenging (Visher & Mallik-Kane, 2007). A criminal conviction limits employment prospects, public housing assistance
and social services (Coates, 2015). Even having a minor criminal record creates substantial barriers and far-reaching
collateral consequences. It is important to transform the current criminal justice system to shift the focus from
reincarceration to successful re-entry into their communities. Socioeconomic factors play an important role in
determining successful re-entry outcomes.
A significant challenge that previously convicted individuals face is re-entry into the labor market. Released prisoners
have difficulty securing and maintaining employment after re-entry since employers are reluctant to hire people with
criminal records (Urban Institute, 2008). In addition to a criminal record, limited education, the stigma of incarceration
and a lack of employment history contribute to limited employment opportunities (McGrew & Hanks, 2017). Also,
most states allow employers to deny jobs to individuals who were previously arrested but never convicted of a crime
(Legal Action Center, 2004). Released prisoners generally find employment and work in low-skill jobs (Urban Institute,
2008) in food service, wholesale, maintenance or the manufacturing industry. These employment opportunities
provide few benefits and little to no opportunities for upward mobility. Furthermore, previously convicted individuals
who manage to secure a job are employed at lower wages than they earned before incarceration (Urban Institute,
2008). Offenders also experience obstacles in public and private job sectors since they are unable to obtain
professional and technical licenses (Holzer, Raphael & Soll 2003). When limited legal employment opportunities and
resources are available, individuals who are re-entering their communities are more likely to reoffend.
Re-entering individuals also face difficulties in finding and securing housing. The high risk of residential instability can
lead some to experience homelessness after release (Fontaine, 2013). Most individuals leave prison with limited
finances to secure an apartment. Additionally, strict housing policies make it harder for these individuals to be
considered as viable candidates for housing. Currently, private market rental housing associations have policies against
renting to people with criminal records (Cortes & Rogers, 2010). Also, individuals with past drug or felony convictions
are ineligible for public housing (Dougherty, 2012). Studies show that the first month after release is a vulnerable
period during which the risk of becoming homeless and/or recidivism is high (Cortes & Rogers, 2010). In fact, the lack
of stable housing can increase the possibility of being rearrested (Cortes & Rogers, 2010). Providing access to
affordable housing options and lenient policies can help support an individual’s transition back into their respective
communities and is an important factor in recidivism prevention.
Returning individuals also face barriers in accessing public assistance. Majority of states ban individuals with drug
felony convictions from being eligible for federally funded public assistance and food stamps (Legal Action Center,
2004). The 1996 Federal Welfare Law prohibits individuals convicted of a drug-related felony from receiving federally
funded food stamps or cash assistance. Re-entering individuals are ineligible even if they have completed their
sentence, overcome their addiction or earned a certificate of rehabilitation (Legal Action Center, 2004). Welfare
assistance is an essential transitional resource for those who face economic hardships after release from prison
(O'Brien, 2002). Denying re-entering individuals from public assistance causes difficulties for them to support
themselves as they leave the criminal justice system and re-enter society. This would increase the likelihood that they
will return to criminal activity and drug use.

The costs of unsuccessful re-entry and reincarceration negatively impacts communities, families and individuals.
Incarceration has disproportionately impacted minorities, primarily young black men, and individuals with low levels of
education (Morenoff and Harding, 2014). A consequence of incarceration is that relationships with families and the
broader community are strained. For communities with high rates of removal and return of offenders, this further
produces immense social and economic disadvantages (Travis, Solomon & Waul, 2001). Evidence shows that the
outcomes of corrections are not cost-effective and do not justify the costs to communities, families and individuals
(Datchi, Barretti & Thompson, 2016).
There is a necessity for effective strategies, which address the barriers that prevent previously incarcerated individuals
from successfully reintegrating into their communities. Released prisoners are disadvantaged educationally,
economically and socially, which further perpetuates inequality (Vishner and Travis, 2003). An approach to reducing
recidivism and assisting previously incarcerated re-enter society successfully is prison education and re-entry
programming. Many states have responded by offering an adult education, adult postsecondary education, career and
technical education, and special education (Taliaferro, Pham and Cielinkski, 2016). A focus on pre-release programs,
which prepares individuals to be productive members of their communities, is essential. Providing incarcerated
individuals with job and life skills, education programming, mental health counseling and addiction treatment will help
overcome some of the challenges they face upon re-entering their communities. Research indicates that inmates who
participate in correctional education programs are 43 percent less likely to re-enter prison (Department of Justice
Archives, 2017). In addition, each dollar spent on prison education saves approximately four dollars on re-incarceration
costs (Department of Justice Archives, 2017).
Different efforts can be initiated by policymakers to reduce barriers and improve re-entry of returning individuals.
Individuals are burdened with a criminal record, no matter how minor the offense and face significant challenges
reintegrating into communities. It is important that re-entry preparation begins on the first day of incarceration and
continues without disruption into the community (APA, 2017). Local governments should support the re-entering
population by allocating funds to expand the programs that assist with the process of re-entry (Bilger, 2016) and
provision of medication-assisted treatment (APA, 2017). In order to ensure continuity of care, it is vital to prioritize
information sharing between justice systems, communities, and physical and behavioral health providers (APA, 2017).
It is important that services provided to incarcerated individuals specifically target their individual needs (Mallik-Kane,
2008). Effective re-entry practices recognize the important relationship that must be established between behavioral,
physical and relational health (APA, 2017).