The Delhi High Court in a recent judgment declared that the refusal of parole to a convict to carry out the last rites of his parent infringes on the right of that convict to dignity as provided by Article 21 of the Indian Constitution.

Facts:

In the petition filed by Ajmer Singh (who was convicted in a 2018 rape case and is currently serving his time in Tihar Jail), Justice Ravinder Dudeja stressed that last rites is a religious and moral obligation. The accused was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment of 14 years, along with a fine of Rs. 1,70,000.

The convict submitted an application seeking emergency parole to perform the last rites of his deceased father. He stated that he is the eldest son in the family, has undergone imprisonment for about 1 year and 9 months (excluding remission), has maintained satisfactory conduct during incarceration, and has never previously availed parole or furlough.

He was seeking two months of emergency parole to perform the funeral rites of his father who had passed away on September 19 due to a heart attack. His counsel informed the court that, being the eldest son, he was obliged to perform both the last rites and other customary rituals for his father.

The Court recognized the seriousness of Singh’s conviction but said that strictly applying parole rules without considering humanitarian reasons would defeat the purpose of parole. The judge noted that parole helps convicts stay connected with their families and meet important personal needs. Considering Singh’s situation, the judge found the denial of parole unacceptable under Article 21, which protects human dignity.

“The right to perform last rites of a parent is an essential religious and moral duty. Denial of parole in such circumstances This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 27/09/2025 at 17:11:26 would violate the petitioner’s right to dignity under Article 21 of the Constitution.” emphasized the court.

Case Title: AJMER SINGH ALIAS PINKA v. THE STATE OF NCT OF DELHI THROUGH SHO KANJAWALA

Appearance

Counsel for Petitioner: Mr. Rajbir Singh Bal and Ms. Sanstuti Mishra, Advs.

Counsel for Respondent: Mr. Amol Sinha, ASC SI Rakesh, P.S.Kanjhawala.