Jaipur, Jan. 9 -- The Rajasthan high court has held that poverty cannot be a reason to deny parole to a prisoner, stating that if a prisoner is economically weak and unable to furnish sureties, an approved parole cannot be rendered ineffective solely on this ground, and doing so would violate Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution. A division bench of justices Arun Monga and Farjand Ali observed while hearing a letter petition submitted by Khartaram, a prisoner serving a life sentence. The petitioner had approached the court through a letter sent from jail, which the court treated as a petition and heard on its merits. Khartaram had been granted a 40-day parole by the district-level parole advisory committee for his fourth regular parole, but a condition to provide two sureties was imposed. Due to his weak financial condition, he was unable to furnish the sureties, even though the high court had earlier waived the surety condition on three occasions on the same grounds. The bench expressed strong displeasure at the administrative approach and said: "We are of the opinion that the insistence on surety bonds in cases of the prisoner's proven indigence and inability to furnish the same is legally unsustainable, constitutionally impermissible and morally indefensible. Otherwise, instead of being a rehabilitative tool, it turns into a selective indulgence reserved for those with means or social capital. Parole is not and cannot be a privilege of the solvent. If it is to serve its humanitarian purpose and legitimacy as an instrument of reform and reintegration, the prisoner's financial incapacity must never be allowed to operate as a disqualifier. Release on personal bond in such cases is not an act of charity but of constitutional compliance." The court ordered Khartaram's release on parole on a personal bond of Rs.50,000, completely waiving the surety condition. It also issued detailed guidelines for the future to ensure that economically weaker prisoners are not forced to repeatedly approach the court....