JUDGMENT 1. Heard Mr. Menezes, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners and Mr. Amonkar, learned Public Prosecutor on behalf of the respondent. 2. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. By consent heard forthwith. 3. The present petition, filed by the sister and mother of the prisoner, for whom parole is sought, takes exception to the order dated 24/02/2014 passed by the respondent on an application dated 10/02/2014 thereby rejecting parole to the brother of the petitioner no. 1, on the ground that no emergent situation exists for granting parole. The petitioners have sought release of the said prisoner, Rajendra Singh on parole. Affidavit-in-reply has been filed by the respondent resisting the application. 4. It is seen that the prisoner namely Rajendra Singh, the brother of the petitioner no.1 and son of the petitioner no. 2, a life convict, was on furlough w.e.f. 16/01/2014 to 12/02/2014 for a period of 28 days. Unfortunately, during the said period of furlough i.e. on 07/02/2014, the petitioner no.1 met with a motor vehicle accident and serious injuries were sustained by her being Group III A Compound Fracture of the 4th and 5th metatarsals of the right foot. The petitioner no. 1 has undergone a major surgery and has been discharged from Goa Medical college Hospital on 09/02/2014. In this regard, the Orthopaedic surgeon of Goa Medical College has issued a certificate stating that on account of the said fracture, he considers that a period of absence from duty of one month with effect from 07/02/2014 is absolutely necessary for restoration of health of the petitioner no.1. The surgeon has also issued a certificate dated 10/02/2014 stating that he considers that the petitioner no. 1 requires bed rest for at least 45 days and an attendant is required to take care of her. 5. Mr. Amonkar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that the prisoner, Rajendra Singh was on furlough from 16/01/2014 to 12/02/2014 and has not even completed a month after return. It is the contention of learned Additional Public Prosecutor that the petitioner no. 1 has her mother, the petitioner no. 2 who is aged 50 years and that even otherwise she can remain admitted in the hospital in which there are attendants and that this is not a serious sickness. According to Mr. Amonkar, serious sickness is that which is likely to result in death. 6. 1 has her mother, the petitioner no. 2 who is aged 50 years and that even otherwise she can remain admitted in the hospital in which there are attendants and that this is not a serious sickness. According to Mr. Amonkar, serious sickness is that which is likely to result in death. 6. Rule 324 of Goa Prison Rules, 2006 lays down as under: “324. When parole to be granted – Parole may be granted to a prisoner in the event of emergent situations like death or serious illness of father, mother, brother, sister, spouse and children and also marriage of brother, sister and children or for any other sufficient cause.” 7. Thus, according to the said amended Rule, parole can be granted to a prisoner inter alia for any sufficient cause and even for marriage of relatives mentioned therein. The provision does not specifically states that the emergent situation of a serious illness is that which is likely to result into the death. There is no rule that once furlough is granted, no parole can be granted within 30 days from the date of return from furlough. One cannot know as to when emergent situation would arise. 8. Mr. Menezes, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners has relied upon the judgment dated 27/07/2007 of the learned Single Judge of this Court in Criminal Writ Petition No. 21 of 2007 between Shri Sher Singh V/s. State of Goa and two others. In paragraph 8 of the judgment in the case supra, it is observed thus: “8. Rule 324 provides as to when parole is to be granted. It states that parole may be granted to a prisoner in the event of emergent situations like death or serious illness of father, mother, brother, sister, spouse and children and also marriage of brother, sister and children. The question is whether the Petitioner's father could be considered to be suffering from an serious illness. The Petitioner's father, as disclosed in the medical certificate is suffering from stricture of the ureterra and is under treatment at the Regional Hospital, Kullu, H.P. and is required to undergo surgery and for that an attendant is necessary. Not every illness is serious. Serious, inter alia, means important, weighty. An illness which is likely to permanently or materially impair, the health of the prisoner could be considered to be serious. Not every illness is serious. Serious, inter alia, means important, weighty. An illness which is likely to permanently or materially impair, the health of the prisoner could be considered to be serious. Considering the illness of the Petitioner's father, as certified by the Medical Officer, Regional Hospital, Kullu and by the Pradhan of the Gram Panchayat at Arsu, the Petitioner ought to have been granted parole as prayed for. The Government does not appear to have exercised its discretion rightly considering the medical report as well as the report of the Pradhan which had further certified that the problem of the Petitioner's father was genuine.” 9. Thus, serious illness is that which is likely to permanently or materially impair the health of a person. Mr. Menezes, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners has then relied upon another judgment dated 24/01/2014 passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court in Criminal Writ Petition No. 2 of 2014 between Shri Vincy Pereira V/s. State of Goa and two others. In the case supra, the mother of the prisoner was about 65 years old and she was high diabetic patient not showing any improvement and was also suffering from accelerated hypertension with cervical spondylosis. She was advised to take bed rest and to attend follow up dates once in a week. Somebody was expected to look after her. The above case is somewhat akin to the present case. In the case (supra), the authority had given other reasons like there was other son of the mother also to take care of her. The learned Single Judge of this Court in the case (supra) held that the authority ought to have granted parole on the ground mentioned in the application. 10. The learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners has also relied upon the case of “Yair Daniel Lavon V/s. State of Goa and another” [2013 (0) BCI 110]. In the case (supra), the medical certificate of the mother of the petitioner revealed that apart from suffering from other ailments, she was also suffering from heart disorder. Considering the said sicknesses, the petitioner was released on parole. 11. Thus, it is evident that emergent situation which is mentioned in Rule 324 of the Prison Rules does not mean that the sickness should be so serious as to be likely to cause death. Considering the said sicknesses, the petitioner was released on parole. 11. Thus, it is evident that emergent situation which is mentioned in Rule 324 of the Prison Rules does not mean that the sickness should be so serious as to be likely to cause death. In the present matter, admittedly the petitioner no.1 has undergone a major surgery for compound fracture of left leg and has been advised to take complete bed rest at least for 45 days as from 10/02/2014 and she requires an attendant to take care of her. The petitioner no. 2, the mother of the petitioner no. 1 has stated on oath that on account of her age and physical constraints, she is not in a position to provide assistance, attendance or care that shall be required by the petitioner no. 1, more particularly to take her to Goa Medical college Hospital for follow up treatment. Male person would be the best attendant, in such circumstances. It is pertinent to note that the Superintendent of Police, North Goa had reported to the respondent that the petitioner no. 1 has sustained fracture injury to her leg due to the motor vehicle accident and there is no other male person to look after her and that the convict person was of a great help to take her for regular treatment at Goa Medical College and Hospital, Bambolim. The respondent has not given a single reason as to why the said report of the Superintendent of Police North Goa has not been considered. 12. The prisoner brother of the petitioner no.1 namely Rajendra Singh was earlier on furlough on 4 occasions and on parole on two occasions and admittedly, there are no complaints of he having violated the conditions of furlough or parole. 13. Considering the medical certificates produced by the petitioners and the statements made in the petition as also considering the affidavit-in-reply filed by the respondent, I am of the view that the petitioners' brother/son should be released on parole. 14. In the result, the petition is allowed. The parole of 30 days shall be granted to the convict Shri Rajendra Singh. Considering the medical certificates produced by the petitioners and the statements made in the petition as also considering the affidavit-in-reply filed by the respondent, I am of the view that the petitioners' brother/son should be released on parole. 14. In the result, the petition is allowed. The parole of 30 days shall be granted to the convict Shri Rajendra Singh. For that purpose the said prisoner shall be released on furnishing a bail bond in the amount which he had earlier executed while being released on furlough during the period from 16/01/2014 to 12/02/2014, with one or two solvent sureties, out of which one shall be local and as per any conditions which are generally imposed in accordance with law, while granting parole. 15. Rule is made absolute in the aforesaid terms. The petition stands disposed of accordingly. 16. Parties to act on duly authenticated copy of the judgment.