Parole not meant for visits to nightclubs,HC reminds Manu Sharma

Justice V K Shali,referring to Manu’s previous conduct,said: “You (Manu) were not given parole (in 2009) for attending nightclubs. You were given parole to attend to your ailing mother and look after your business affairs.”

To this,Jethmalani said it was not that only bad people visited nightclubs: “Very decent people,including some reputed lawyers and others from the Bar,visit such places. Moreover,even going to a bar when one is on parole is not an offence in itself.”

The judge was not impressed by this argument and said: “Business is not attended to at nightclubs. Parole is given on certain conditions and because of certain reasons. For all these years,you have not reformed and you went to a nightclub during parole and got into a brawl.”

Jethmalani denied allegations of breach of parole conditions and claimed that the court could not overlook that Manu may have been in the bar for a business matter. He also disputed the term ‘nightclub’ and called it a “misnomer”,arguing Manu was in fact at a restaurant-cum-bar.

On the question of Manu’s reformation,Jethmalani contended that his client had been given a certificate of excellence by the jail authorities and the jail superintendent had no objection to his release on parole.

“Moreover,for release on parole,2010 guidelines stipulates that the prisoner’s conduct for only past one year is relevant. Even if you were bad two years earlier but maintained a good record in the past one year,one is entitled to parole as per the fresh guidelines,” Jethmalani said.

Claiming he was seeking parole to maintain his family ties,Jethmalani submitted the schedule for the marriage ceremonies of Manu’s brother and said he should be released for attending all the functions.

The court reserved its verdict on Manu’s plea and said it would pass an order on Wednesday.