Desire To Console Ailing Parents No Ground For Emergent Parole: Delhi High Court Denies Relief To UAPA Accused

The Delhi High Court has observed that an undertrial's desire to console ailing parents, is not, by itself, a ground for emergent parole under the Delhi Prison Rules.

Justice Ravinder Dudeja dismissed the plea filed by a UAPA accused challenging the trial court order dismissing his application seeking custody parole for two weeks.

Mohamed Ali Jinnah, jailed since September 22, 2022, had sought custody parole in order to visit and console his ailing parents and brother. He wanted to assist his family and provide them support.

He is facing prosecution in an NIA case registered under Section 120B, 121A, 122 and 153A of IPC and various provisions of the stringent Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967.

His application was dismissed by the trial court after verification report was obtained from the authorities stating that his parents and brother were not suffering from any emergent or life threatening ailments.

It was his case that the ailments of his parents, particularly his mother's cancer diagnosis, fell within the ambit of “severe illness”.

He said that being the elder son, he had a duty to take care of his ailing parents and provide emotional and logistical support.

It was contender that Rule 1203 of the Delhi Prison Rules, 2018, mandates that Custody Parole may be granted to the under trial prisoner in the eventuality of serious health issue of family member.

On the other hand, the prosecution opposed the plea saying that the allegations in chargesheet pertained to conspiracy wherein Jinnah, being NEC member of the banned organization Popular Front of India (PFI), along with other members, was involved in raising and channelizing funds for the purposes of carrying out unlawful and terrorist activities and propagating a divisive ideology against the Government of India.

It was submitted that no life-threatening condition of Jinnah's parents was shown which would justify the grant of custody parole to him and that adequate medical treatment was being provided for his family members.

Rejecting the plea, the Court said that while Jinnah had placed on record certain medical certificates relating to his parents' and brother's health, none of the documents indicated any emergent medical procedure or life- threatening situation that necessitated his presence.

The Court noted that Jinnah was facing trial for offences under the UAPA, where the allegations involved conspiracy and unlawful activities affecting national integrity.

It added that while the presumption of innocence must operate until conviction, the gravity of the charges cannot be ignored in the exercise of discretionary powers relating to parole.

“The right to family life under Article 21 must indeed be respected even for undertrial prisoners, but such right is subject to lawful restrictions imposed in the interest of security, discipline, and the administration of justice. The petitioner's desire to console his parents, though understandable, cannot by itself constitute a ground for emergent parole under Rule 1203 of the Delhi Prison Rules, 2018,” the Court said.

“In view of the above discussion, this Court finds no infirmity in the impugned order dated 18.10.2025 passed by the Ld. Trial court. The petitioner has failed to make out any emergent or exceptional ground as envisaged under Rule 1203 of the Delhi Prison Rules, 2018, for grant of custody parole. Accordingly, the petition is dismissed,” it added.

Counsel for Petitioner: Mr. A. Nowfal, Mr. Shaikh Saipan, Mr. Md. Arif Hussain, Advocates

Counsel for Respondent: Mr. Rahul Tyagi, SPP, NIA with Mr. Vikas Walia, SPP, NIA with Mr. Jatin, ASPP, NIA and Mr. Amit Rohila, Advocate

Title: MOHAMED ALI JINNAH v. NATIONAL INVESTIGATION AGENCY

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1473

Click here to read order